Monday, November 6

Barenaked Ladies Heap More Doubt on McQueary...and Freeh

Barenaked Ladies performed at the Bryce Jordan Center on Friday, February 9, 2001 -- heaping even more doubt about McQueary's version of events and the competency of Louis Freeh's investigation

hat tip, Wendy Silverwood
By 
Ray Blehar

November 6, 2017, 2:06 PM EST, Updated 9:16 PM EST

According to Mike McQueary, he believed the infamous shower incident in the Lasch Football Building (LFB) occurred on the Friday night before Spring Break 2001 or 2002 because the campus was empty.   

When the date was later adjusted to February 9, 2001, the idea that campus was empty wouldn't have been so, however, the LFB would have been deserted because the grueling football recruiting period had just ended and the staff would have taken some time off.

Regardless,  Mike's reasons for going to the LFB that Friday still don't add up.   And now, the latest evidence adds even more doubt to Mike's scenario considering that he had no recollection of  a major concert event taking place on campus that night.

This evidence also supports the notion that Louis Freeh's $8.5 million dollar investigation wasn't worth a nickel.


According to the Daily Collegian, the Barenaked Ladies were live in concert at the Bryce Jordan Center (BJC) on February 9, 2001. 






































Had McQueary driven to and from the LFB on that Friday night at the time he alleges he did, then he should undoubtedly seen campus safety/security personnel and various temporary barriers erected along his route.  Non-event traffic going to the north side of campus is typically directed off University Drive and down Hastings Road to Bigler Road.  Not only that, but the BJC leaks sound and when Mike stepped out of his car he had to hear the concert music. See map below.



Worse yet, former FBI Director Louis Freeh's $8.5 million investigation failed to uncover this rather significant evidence that calls McQueary's recollection of that night into serious question.

Freeh's report was hailed by former PSU Trustee Kenneth Frazier as "comprehensive and thorough."

Former President Rodney Erickson called it a "comprehensive account."

Similarly, the NCAA's Mark Emmert lauded Freeh's investigation, opined: "I could have sent my entire team in there for five years and couldn't have gotten anywhere near that level of detailed understanding of what went on there."
  
KC Johnson, who was a critic of Duke's handling of the rape allegations against the lacrosse team also defended the Freeh Report, stated:  "Nearly identical missives from a handful of renegade PSU trustees, the family of ex-coach Joe Paterno, and a handful of former Penn State football players all slammed the Freeh Report as biased and filled with factual errors--but were unable to identify even one specific way in which the report was biased, or point out even one factual error that made the critics' case.”
As readers of this blog know, those who defended the Freeh Report were wrong and the critics of the report had the evidence on their side.  The latest information provides rather significant evidence that the Freeh Report was a complete sham.

And perhaps so were Mike McQueary's versions of events on the night of February 9, 2001.

The latest evidence makes you seriously wonder what Mike really remembered about that Friday night or if he was even on campus.

23 comments:

  1. This seems a very significant finding that was missed, or intentionally ignored, by prosecutors, defense attorneys and the mainstream media. What are the odds the mainstream media will continue to ignore it?

    It is more evidence that the shower incident may have happened before Feb. 9, and McQueary waited a while to report it.

    The Feb. 8, 2001 newspaper reports that the PSU wide receiver's coach, Kenny Jackson, was leaving for the Steelers may have prompted McQueary to report the shower incident to Paterno. McQueary may have wanted to use the shower incident report as an excuse to meet alone with Paterno and ask him for the wide receiver's coaching position.

    McQueary testified that the first thing Paterno told him when he answered the phone on Feb. 10, 2001 was that Paterno had no job for McQueary. That suggests that McQueary had asked for a permanent job before.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tim,
      My first comment was not correct regarding the coaching staff knowing about Kenny's departure. Only Joe, Kenny, and one other coach were aware he was going to the Steelers.

      So your theory has some legs to it. It may have been Mike observed a benign incident of Jerry showering with a kid a some unknown time and then attempted to use that as an excuse to meet with Joe.

      The other theory that Mike & his father used a shower incident as a scheme to try to leverage JVP for a job still has legs too.

      Delete
  2. Now that Penn State settled with Mike McQueary to end his lawsuit, that's one less court case where some of this might come out.

    I wonder how much Penn State secretly paid him to end it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rumor has it that he got $9.5 million. Not a bad chunk of change for a guy who allegedly saw a rape, did nothing about it for 10 years, then said he didn't do anything about it because he was satisfied with PSU's response to the incident.

      And let's not forget he was awarded money for being defamed by Graham Spanier's statement -- not by the grand jury presentment.

      Mike testified he didn't read the presentment, he only apparently knew that it "twisted his words."

      Talk about a corrupt system.

      Delete
    2. Was that $9.5 million total to McQueary and his lawyers or just to him? The lawyers alone had wanted $1.7 million.

      Doesn't seem like a very good deal for Penn State but then they would probably have just wasted millions more fighting it and lost because of the corrupt PA judges who never find any trial errors.

      Delete
  3. Does anyone ever see McQ around town? Is he a pariah? Enough pressure & I bet that rich bastard cracks.

    ReplyDelete
  4. We all know that Penn State has been serving as the wellspring of cash for these corrupt players that framed Paterno and the PSU 3. And they continue to hide their ill-gotten wealth within their commandeered PSU slush fund. Like a parasite feeding off of its host, these crooks will not drop off unless the University stops doing "business" in the form of accepting large donations.

    One way to starve the BoT parasite is to temporarily limit or stop the flow of large private donations and operate on a starvation or survival type of budget that only supports the education of the students. Sure, a lot will be forfeited for awhile,(like unnecessary construction), but it will be worth it to return the University to its original singular purpose of education through Success with Honor. PSU has been hijacked and now serves as a secret bank for Pennsylvania's network of corporate and political corruption.

    Think about it, giving McQueary almost 10 million dollars to lie and frame Paterno with a child rape fable is how they are spending PSU's money. And giving Louis the Liar Freeh his 8.3 million to lie on national television is just purely criminal.

    So by temporarily refusing the endless supply of "donations" to be laundered at PSU for the "upstanding" developers and their politician bed pals, the BoT parasite on PSU's back might just drop off.

    One of the highest-paid university presidents in the nation, Eric Barron, will certainly not support or initiate something like this. Simply because there is a reason he is among the top highest-paid in the nation.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The concert fact was originally mentioned by BWI poster @Chris92. I forgot about it then in popped into my head yesterday morning and I easily looked it up. Chris92 also stated there was a hockey game at 9:15 over at Greenberg (more cars, more people on campus) and that it was a 60 degree day.

    In State College. In February.

    Lots of markers there for your memory - over an incident that "traumatized" Mike.

    My biggest gripe in all of this is WHY did Tony Sassano got to great lengths to concoct the bullshit "Rudy" story? Why lie about Mike being up on campus? What's wrong with that story? We know Mike's very first 2010 police statement he claims he was on campus "working late".

    Eileen blogged about that timeline using Trooper Rossman's recording of Mike's statement.

    Why did the OAG need Mike to be OFF CAMPUS that evening, and set up the narrative that he was home in bed watching coincidentally , a football movie. They forgot to have him in his jammies, curled up with a bowl of popcorn for chrissakes.

    The OAG goes to great lengths to run with 2002, then "discovers" the date of 2001, when all along Mike was clear that Joe told him over the phone "I don't have a job open" - which if they had simply probed further - would have ID'd the Kenny Jackson/Steelers thing and the date.

    Obviously they didn't want that detail to be a part of the narrative. Is it that simple? Was Mike simply pitching this shower "molestation" as a way to get in front of Joe and curry favor for a coveted position on the staff?

    Did it not work out as Mike thought, so he dropped it and totally forgot about it until the AG came sniffing around?

    Then the shitstorm happens, everyone dives into a bunker and doubles down on their own version of the "facts".

    I am not sure the theory that Mike may have been using another date other than February 9th, 2001 would wash. Suppose Jerry was somewhere else on February 9, 2001 and was able to produce documentation that he was indeed NOT at Lasch at that time period.

    The stench of corruption & misconduct by the OAG continues to swirl around Mike's alleged timeline of events that evening.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wendy - kudos to you and others for bird-dogging this. I noticed that the BWI thread you mentioned (and another one) were banished to the test board, with replies locked. Any idea what's going on there? I hope BWI does not become like BSD, where all conversations about Sandusky were eliminated and only "happy football talk" was permitted.

      Delete
    2. 84Lion - no idea about threads moving. The BWI Mods can do whatever they like. I do appreciate a lot of the opinions on this epic mess on that forum however, since I don't follow sports and they allow non-sports discussions.

      Delete
    3. Wendy,
      The Rudy - TV Guide story was done for two reasons one of which is far more important than the other.

      The most important reason was to cover up the fact that the OAG already knew the date was 2001 when it charged Curley and Schultz (beyond the statute of limitations). It is a certainty that it already possessed the "Schultz file" when it questioned Schultz at the grand jury...and those documents referenced February 2001.

      The other reason of lesser importance was that the OAG was trying to show how competent and hard working its investigators were. So Sassano testified to using the TV Guide to triangulate the date and to doing a 50-mile radius search to find victims.

      The 50 mile search missed Victim 9 -- who lived about 25 miles away (as the crow, er, vulture flies). Sassano also missed finding Victim 9 when his name was found on the camper lists from Sandusky's basement (in June 2011).

      Sassano also said he found Victim 7 from using lists found in Jerry's office in April 2011, which was also a lie. Victim 7 was interviewed by the police in February 2011.

      The OAG has lied about this case all along. They could have arrested and convicted Sandusky in June 2009, however, there were political forces against it. The only reason Sandusky is in jail is because Tom Corbett wanted to get rid of Spanier.

      Delete
  6. Wendy - The theory isn't that "Mike may have been using another date other than February 9th, 2001." It's that Feb. 9 might not be the actual date because of Mike's poor memory or because he's hiding the real truth.

    One theory is it may have been days or weeks earlier and McQueary just decided to report it on Feb. 10 to get a private meeting with Paterno after the wide receiver's coaching position opened up on Feb. 8. If that was the case, it would undermine McQueary's contention that he considered it a very serious matter, and he contacted Paterno the next day.

    The Feb. 10 meeting with Paterno is corroborated by other evidence, such as Schultz's consultation with the lawyer the next day and the ensuing emails.

    The Feb. 9 date for the shower incident relies only on McQueary's poor memory and has been contradicted by the activity on campus that night and the busy football week with the Feb. 8 Kenny Jackson announcement he's leaving for the Steelers and the Feb. 7 national signing day.

    Then there is the recent McQueary-Eshbach email release in which McQueary claimed his father wasn't home the night of Feb. 9.

    Even if Sandusky had documentation that he was elsewhere on Feb. 9, 2001, it would not have helped him much because he admitted he was with a boy in the shower but that it was not as McQueary alleged.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good points.

      But I'm confused. (which isn't hard these days). Let's say Feb 9, 2001 was not the date as Tony "TV Guide" Sassano "triangulated" & Jerry has documentation showing he was no where near campus that evening.

      We know the AG used that date because of the not-so-secret-secret emails and let Louis Freeh grandstand about determining the date.

      Wouldn't that have blown the state's case out of the water? The state confirming the date of Feb 9, 2001 would have been, to quote Tom Corbett - a calculated risk.

      The McQueary "shower episode" is the linchpin to the state's entire case. And I am still of the opinion that the "anal rape" meme came from Fina's fellow porn pal prosecutor Patrick Blessington working the concurrent Monsignor Lynn case in Phila.

      Mike was used by the AG for their own machinations. That is blindingly obvious at this point. Tom Corbett's "calculated risk" to use this to torch Dr. Spanier blew up on all of them.

      They should have indicted the Second Mile leadership duo of Raykovitz & Genovese. Everyone in public office would have won. But that's a rant for another day.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. If Sandusky had proof he wasn't on campus Feb. 9, 2001, why didn't he use it at trial?

      Sandusky admitted before trial that he was in the shower with a boy, who he even identified. That meant the date not being Feb. 9 was not really a defense for Sandusky.

      If the date was not Feb. 9, then that would really hurt Mike McQueary's credibility, particularly about his testimony that he felt it was urgent, and he contacted Paterno early the next day. The Feb. 10 meeting with Paterno is corroborated by Schultz's meeting with the lawyer the day after and the emails.

      If the Spanier trial judge's novel ruling holds up on appeal, then Raykovitz and the others could still be indicted on child endangerment until 2039. The judge ruled that the statute of limitations for child endangerment was not until the victim's 50th birthday.

      Delete
  7. I've always considered this ruses within hoaxes within strategems. Why did Sassano feel it necessary to construct an elaborate diversion? Why did MM associate slapping sounds with sex (a conditioned response)? Most males who have been in locker rooms would associate slapping sounds with snapping towels and wet footballs being thrown (I can still feel the sting!). (You ought to get in a shower with your significant other and see if you can make any noise. You really can't unless she spanks you for poor performance.)

    The other issue is the janitors. Has anyone determined what union represented them? I've never heard of a member of a powerful public works union being afraid of being fired for anything, let alone reporting child abuse. Can you imagine what type of grievance would be filed? No! Fina had to have something big on Petrovsky to get him to commit perjury. But why did Fina even need the janitors? There were other ways to paint a vivid picture of a little boy being pinned against a wall (and thus poisoning the jury pool and enraging the media) rather than taking down Paterno and the football program. The janitor hoax was devised to destroy Paterno. Why?

    Now we come to Kenneth Frazier, who was negotiating Merke's Vioxx liability with the OAG at the same time he was doing their bidding as head of the special investigative committee. Conflict of interest? Has anyone analyzed Merke's settlement with PA as opposed to other states or done an analysis on what the payment should have been? Frazier's performance at Freeh's press conference looked rehearsed. Just too smooth.

    Now Baldwin. At about the time she "flipped", her daughter was involved in a fatal traffic accident. The case seemed to just disappear. A coincidence??

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You say Cynthia Baldwin's daughter killed someone in a car accident. I guess the apple doesn't fall far from the tree because Cynthia Baldwin killed a man in a car accident too.

      http://www.wpxi.com/news/top-stories/family-wants-harsher-penalty-for-fatal-crash/525862006

      The latter wasn't widely reported, and I've not heard of a wrongful death lawsuit against Baldwin. Perhaps no lawyer would take the case because Baldwin is so well connected.

      Delete
    2. Gregory,
      Thanks for your comments.

      The janitors were represented by the Teamsters. Yeah, go figure. One of the most mobbed up unions that exist. No way would those guys have feared losing their jobs.

      I unveiled this hoax back in November 2012. There is no way Petrosky came forward on the day of Ganim's big story on the investigation because she didn't write about McQueary. And that's what Petrosky said he read about.

      I'm sure the AG induced Petrosky and Witherite to embellish their benign observations of Sandusky showering with kids -- once it learned that a former janitor suffered from dementia (and could be used as a patsy).

      The janitor narrative was all about convicting Spanier in the court of public opinion. The AG needed a second serious crime in the locker room after Sandusky received emeritus status. I'm sure the two janitors thought, as Mike did, that the AG wouldn't make them out to be bad people. They were right.

      I haven't looked into the Merck settlement and I agree that the Baldwin case disappearing is more evidence of corruption.

      Delete
    3. Gregory - Why did Mike associate slapping sounds with sex?

      Perhaps a guy who sends photos of his stunningly erect penis to random women HE'S NEVER EVEN MET IN PERSON using his web-enabled cell phone speaks highly of the constant prurient mindset and his decision-making skills.

      Most normal people would want to get to know the person a bit before they engage in revealing their genitals to them. Radical concept, I know - but maybe taking her out for a cup of coffee first before you unzip your pants?

      For all Mike knows, he was being catfished by some 50 year old dude from New Jersey, or worse yet - a 15, 16, 17 year old girl posing as an adult woman on Facebook. Jeezus - Mike thought this was a great idea after ALL that's gone down, he's nationally recognized & he's embroiled in a major lawsuit?

      I can only imagine what his mindset was and decision making skills were before the shitstorm happened.

      It's bad enough we had hard core porn-addled state prosecutors working on this case. These guys were guffawing & harassing the female staffers about their breasts and laffing it up while at their work computers in the AG's office over various objects shoved up our collective vaginas and they thought anal penetration of women was a real hoot!

      This insensitivity by these players obsessed with porn & penises is why I think the "3 slapping sounds" got out of control and cemented itself as a violent crime.

      Still begs the question of why Raykovitz & Genovese - after having Tim Curley in their office complaining of their charity chairman's out of program contact with a Second Mile youth - didn't tighten up the oversight with charity clients. Especially when they were well aware of out of program contact with 2 Second Mile kids in 1998, that was escalated through the system.

      Our AG Josh Shapiro is well aware of this, telling us here in PA "No One Is Above The Law" - yet curiously the Swim Trunks CEO and his certified school teacher wife are except.

      I don't get it.

      Delete
    4. AG Josh Shapiro's first responsibility is to his CCC camp. And that doesn't stand for Civilian Conservation Corps. It stands for Corrupt Corporate Cabal. His job for them is to make sure he doesn't address the injustices they have committed against innocent people. Josh Shapiro's statement, "no one is above the law" is proof positive he is duplicitous. Simply because his actions, or lack thereof, belie his words.

      Notice how the two goons, Ken Frazier and Josh Shapiro have already had high profile interactions with Trump that seemingly give them the opportunity to publicly "denounce" Trump's feigned indifference to racial issues? Both of these clowns, Shapiro and Frazier are about as crooked as they come. And our "trusted" media touts these two as "taking the moral high ground" against Trump---ha, what a joke! This CCC stuff goes all the way up to the Oval Office.

      Delete
    5. Yes, Shapiro would look nice in an orange jump suit for suborning perjury in Spanier's trial. But who is going to prosecute the prosecutor? And Frazier should be in Club Fed for negligent homicide for his role in the fraudulent Vioxx data package Merke sent to FDA.

      Delete
    6. GV,

      Yes, I agree. It would be so nice to see Shapiro and Frazier in a Larry Nassar-style striped jumpsuit. And how about Cynthia Baldwin's latest attempt to redeem herself? "Fighting Words" she calls it. Notice how the crooked media works with these folks that have conspired to shift Second Mile's blame on to PSU?

      I guess Cynthia Baldwin doesn't quite achieve the same criminal status as Frazier and Josh Shapiro. The corrupt national media allows them to play off of Trump's bad guy persona in a lame attempt to redeem themselves. Whereas, Baldwin can only write her own pathetic little local piece. Ah yes, an attempt to have us believe she is a paragon of virtue. She did however indirectly refer to Trump with her statement, "I'm for fewer Americans infatuated with fame, wealth and power". She probably begged to have some high profile opportunity to "denounce" some specific ham-handed Trump event. Sorry Cynthia, you're not as powerful and wealthy as Josh Shapiro and Ken Frazier. You keep working at it though, and maybe next year the Washington Propaganda Post will give you a bit part to denounce Trump.

      Delete
  8. I forgot to mention - that at the Spanier trial, Dr. Dranov testifed that Randy Feathers was in his office interviewing him (late January 2011) and Dranov remembered he was off to a medical conference that weekend.

    He reached behind his desk to the credenza, found the binder from that conference, and voilĂ  - there's the date. That's how "they" determined the date.

    So I have to ask yet again, if Investigator Randy Feathers now knows the date is that weekend in February, 2001 - why does Sassano bother to concoct the bullshit Rudy story and testify to it at the Sandusky trial in June 2012?

    Don't these guys compare notes?

    And - if the OAG already knows by end of January 2011 what the infamous shower date is, why make Louis Freeh the mouthpiece for that with his bullshit line of "my team found the emails"? Was this because the OAG was waiting for Curley and Schultz to still flip on Spanier, while using their tortured interpretation of a 2006 amendment?

    Did the OAG toss the ball to fellow former prosecutor Louis Freeh so he could apply the heat?

    Spanier wasn't charged until after Freeh's grandstanding press conference with the bullshit "humane" emails - that coincidentally were leaked to Altoona homegirl Susan Candiotti of CNN fame. Susan would have very well known Feathers and Sassano from growing up and working in Altoona.

    The misconduct is stunning.

    ReplyDelete