Thursday, September 25

Frazier, Tomalis Received Updates About OAG Investigation of Spanier, Curley, and Schultz

Email reveals that Frazier and Tomalis were privy to PA OAG's "flip" strategy for Curley, Schultz, and Spanier.

Ray Blehar

In a document dated 31 January 2012, which was obtained via my investigation in November 2012, lead prosecutor Frank Fina had informed PSU officials that he "expected C & S to flip."  As my blog post on 18 August revealed, the Sandusky trial transcripts indicated that the ultimate target of the OAG was Graham Spanier.

E-mails obtained by Ryan Bagwell through his RTKL efforts, provide more evidence that members of the PSU Board of Trustees -- and specifically Special Investigations Task Force Co-chairs -- Kenneth Frazier and Ronald Tomalis were included in the group who were being updated by the OAG.   E-mails also reveal that the Freeh group received an update on the OAG's impending announcement of the Spanier charges.

The June 3, 2012 e-mail below indicates that Schultz had decided not to "cooperate."  In other words, he had turned down a deal to "flip" on Spanier.

While some may argue that this email is discussing participation in the Freeh (fake) investigation, logic and evidence proves that was not the case.  With Curley and Schultz facing charges, it was well established that they could not speak about anything pertaining to the case, thus wouldn't be considered as individuals to be interviewed by the Freeh group.  Spanier, on the other hand, had reached out to the Freeh group at the beginning of the "investigation" and offered to meet with them several times.

From ESPN:

"Since November of last year, when he resigned his presidency, he has wanted the Freeh Group to create an accurate report and has been determined to assist in any way he can," said the statement from Spanier's lawyers. They ended their four-paragraph statement by saying they remained "hopeful that truth and reason prevail."

This email erases any thought that the investigation conducted at Penn State was conducted "independently" and "in parallel" to the OAG's.  Clearly, the SITF co-chairs were being kept informed of the progress of the OAG investigation.

But what about the Freeh group?  Were they too being kept abreast of the OAG investigation's progress?

Freeh Group Informed of Pending Spanier Charges

On October 31, 2012, the day before the Conspiracy of Silence presentment was released, Frank Fina called Greg Paw of the Freeh group to inform him of the pending charges.  Paw emailed Fina back and asked if it could wait until the next day (Thursday, November 1st) or Friday?

Obviously, it couldn't wait because by the next day, the information that Fina was going to tell Paw would have been all over the news.  Thus, Fina requested that he "call quick now?"

The Conspiracy of Silence presentment is referred to as the Freeh Report-Lite in some circles because it appears to utilize much of the same language and content from the Freeh Report. Other emails after the Sandusky conviction and the release of the Freeh Report revealed the cooperation between the Freeh group and the OAG (reported here by Ryan Bagwell).  There is little doubt that the November 1st report was a collaborative effort by the Freeh team and the OAG.

The October 31st email revealed that the OAG maintained contact with the Freeh Group at least until Spanier was charged and additional charges were filed against Curley and Schultz.  Fina's rather urgent message to Paw, as well as the other Bagwell emails,  reveal that the two entities had formed a bond of sorts during their work together.

This email also raises the possibility that the Freeh group was billing Penn State for work outside the scope of the contract.  While the final cost of the Freeh "investigation" and report was a little over $8.1 million, additional billings were received from Freeh, Sporkin, and Sullivan (FSS) after the completion of the "investigation."  One has to wonder what exactly were the nature of these billings.

Perhaps someone on the BOT might request an audit?

Emails Prove Freeh Caught In Another Lie

The evidence reveals that Louis Freeh has been caught in another lie regarding the independence of his "investigation" at Penn State.

From his press conference transcript:

While independent, our work was done in parallel with several other active investigations by agencies and governmental authorities, including the Pennsylvania Attorney General, Pennsylvania State Police, United States Attorney, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and U.S. Department of Education. We continuously interfaced and cooperated with those agencies and authorities. We also received assistance from the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC). As promised, we immediately turned over any relevant evidence we found to these authorities, such as the critical February 27, 2001 emails between Messrs. Spanier, Schultz and Curley. 

Previously, evidence from the Moulton report and judicial proceedings revealed he lied about his team's "independent discovery" of the email evidence.  Moulton's report (page 158) revealed the emails were turned over to the Pennsylvania State Police on July 7, 2011.   Thus, the situation was the exact opposite of the situation stated by Freeh -- he didn't turn over evidence to the authorities; the OAG turned evidence over to him (or used the PSU legal counsel and/or the SITF as an intermediary).


Louis Freeh and FSS did not conduct a full, fair, and independent "investigation" of Sandusky's crimes occurring at Penn State.  The evidence uncovered so far indicates that Freeh investigation was little more than a public relations ploy to provide the appearance of an "independent" investigation.

The majority of people, especially the media, were taken in by the ruse.  However, at least one media member was not.   Snigdha Prakash, wrote in Slate magazine, that the selection of Frazier to lead the SITF would result in a cover-up.

Prakash was right about a cover-up, but missed on figuring out what would be covered up.  It was not PSU's role in the Sandusky scandal, but rather the Commonwealth's failure to take Sandusky off the streets in 1998.

Freeh's team was complicit in that cover-up.

Give to the Penn State Sunshine Fund


  1. Another great article Ray. I think what you said in your final two sentences defines the true cover-up perfectly: "It was not PSU's role in the Sandusky scandal, but rather the Commonwealth's failure to take Sandusky off the streets in 1998."; "Freeh's team was complicit in that cover-up".
    I do have to contemplate the word "failure" here as it applies to the Commonwealth not taking Sandusky off of the streets in 1998. When I think of failure, I think of trying to achieve something positive but missing it. I don't think the Attorney General's office under Tom Corbett even wanted to achieve the appropriate, and positive outcome of properly investigating Sandusky and removing him from the street before he could hurt many more children. In my mind, they were successful in doing something intentionally illegal and immoral for monetary gain. By non-corrupt society standards, the PA state government failed in protecting our children. But by their own self-serving, greed-driven standards, they succeeded, at least initially, in covering their corrupt and illegal actions and placing blame elsewhere.
    None of this would have been possible without a corrupt officer at the top, Frank Noonan. He's ex-FBI. Interesting, brings to mind another key player in the Commonwealth's cover-up, Louis Freeh, ex-FBI. Now I certainly don't want to lump all the good men and women of the FBI into this Freeh and Noonan category. But there seems to be a tendency for some ex-FBI men to abuse the public's trust. Men such as Louis Freeh prostitute their reputations to corrupt organizations looking to hide their white-collar crimes behind the label of FBI.
    Wasn't Noonan a participant in the Louis Freeh and Linda Kelly kangaroo court? Didn't he make public statements that supported the Freeh fiction? Isn't he Corbett-appointed? And now he and Corbett are at the forefront of this Eric Frein accusation and manhunt. "An attack on society" says Corbett. Was a serial pedophile ignored by law enforcement for over a decade not an attack on society? Didn't Frank Noonan defend the fact that only one trooper was assigned to the Sandusky case with no results? But now Noonan has literally thousands of troopers searching for the alleged killer of one of his own. How much will all of this manpower and equipment cost the taxpayers? Just food for thought, that's all, food for thought.

    1. Thanks for the kind words.

      I agree that Corbett, et al, were going to let Sandusky go -- up until the budget battle of March 2011. Then Corbett used Sandusky to oust his Spanier.

      Freeh's tenure at the FBI was not a positive one....funny how the media held him accountable then, but not now.

    2. No doubt Freeh's tenure with the FBI was not a positive one. I suppose I should have worded my statement, "Men such as Louis Freeh prostitute their
      *affiliation* with the FBI to corrupt organizations...". Freeh's 'reputation' has always been badly tarnished. He completely exposed himself with his attempt at framing Richard Jewell. But somehow, the corporate underworld was able to repackage Freeh to the public as someone with integrity. Bought-off media cleaned him up with all the pictures of him standing in front of American flags and touting him as some sort of an exciting 007 kind of guy. Seesh, what a joke! Freeh is not only incompetent, but he's unethical and a known pathological liar.

      The timing of Freeh's "accident" making him indisposed, and Noonan's Rambo assault "threat to society" cataclysm seems somewhat odd. They are each basically unavailable. Noonan is a "hero" that is badly needed to protect all of the citizens in Pennsylvania from a desperate criminal right now, and poor Louis Freeh is laid up after "terrorists somehow made him lose consciousness". These guys really play us for all we're worth!

  2. This whole scandal can be boiled down to this, and contrary to what people want to believe, it really is this simple: Nobody in a position of power wanted Sandusky caught. If Sandusky is not involved with the Second Mile, there are no huge sums of money being donated to the charity. I mean, really, who wants to golf or have dinner with Raykovitz? Sandusky's involvement kept big BIG money flowing into the Second Mile. Big money coming into the Second Mile means the charity's board can vote themselves lavish salaries. These lavish salaries can then be used to make various political contributions. Where else did the $650,000 that was donated by The Second Mile's board to Corbett's gubernatorial campaign come from?

    It's no wonder Pennsylvania was recently voted the fifth most corrupt state in the union.

    1. Ab4psu,
      Very astute observation, however, more money is involved with this scandal than just donations to The Second Mile....

      ...and when the full story is exposed, Pennsylvania should move up to its deserved #1 spot as most corrupt state in the union.

  3. With the recent bombshell that many members of the Attorney General's staff received and/or forwarded porn emails on their office accounts, including Frank Feathers and Frank Noonan, one wonders if that may be why Penn State is fighting Ryan Bagwell's requests for emails.

    Maybe the switch from 5 years to 6 months email retention in the AG's office was to wipe out the porn stash!

    1. Tim,
      I think you are asserting that some PSU folks may have done similar things on computers. Certainly, that's a possibility, but I think their fighting of discovery is more along the lines of this post. They were collaborating with everyone involved....there was no "cram down" of sanctions.

      The "draft" report that Freeh/Frazier put out in July 2012 was a rush job. The NCAA and Big Ten wanted this thing sewn up before the season started.

      Football culture, eh?

  4. Ray,
    Another great article, thank you for your dedication and passion for exposing the truth. Your efforts are greatly appreciated.

    It appears that the current porno email scandal does play a role in your story line. News reports indicate that Frank Fina was the center of the distribution network. The inclusion of a high level judge or judges makes this even more dangerous. Chief Justice Castille of the PA Supreme Court wants answers regarding any involvement from the Judicial Branch.

    Personal emails exchanged between judges and law enforcement expose a level of fraternization that is unacceptable in our legal system. In addition, bribery attempts utilizing pornography as a way to manipulate law enforcement and judges are certainly possible.

    In many ways, Fina and OAG acted with unbridled restraints since 2007. The porno email network could help to explain the ease with which OAG manipulated the courts.

  5. Ray,

    Any new developments on the federal investigation?