Wednesday, February 26

Thanking John Ziegler and Going In a Different Direction

Recent events has caused me to pause and reflect on the search for truth in the Sandusky scandal.

I first got involved with the scandal after writing a letter to PSU President Rodney Erickson suggesting that Penn State rebut the Freeh Report.   When that rebuttal didn't happen and PSU signed the Consent Decree, I realized something was terribly amiss.

At the same time this occurred, Barry Bozeman, the originator of asked me to co-author this site and join him in the search for the truth. The TRUTH is all we sought.  We never sought money or fame.

Right after the Freeh Report was written, John Ziegler stepped up and wrote quite a good rebuttal.  Barry Bozeman got notpsu aligned with John, Marc Rubin, and Walter Uhler to form the Framing.Paterno network.  Eventually, John and I were the sole survivors of the original group and Eileen Morgan and Tom Owens were added to the fold and continuing to pursue the truth.  Obviously, I would be remiss if I did not mention Franco Harris, who became the "front man" for our pursuit.

I think John deserves a lot of credit for being one of the first out of the gate and taking on the challenge of clearing Joe Paterno's name.  He did it with nothing financially to gain and with great courage and personal sacrifice.

However, John has taken a different direction in his pursuit of the truth and I am afraid we have come to a point of irreconcilable differences.

John believes the only way to exonerate Joe Paterno is to clear Jerry Sandusky of his crimes.  If I understand him correctly, his theory is that Sandusky is innocent and/or his acts were not egregious enough for the authorities to intervene.  John believes the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania officials  "railroaded" Jerry in order to enhance their careers.

On the other hand, my analysis of the available evidence in the case indicates that there are multiple layers of cover-ups and deceptions.  I came to this position over time, adding layers as I found the evidence.

For the record, my themes of the case are:
1.  Sandusky is a serial child molester and guilty of many crimes under the relevant statutes.
2.  The Commonwealth had a financial interest in covering up the failures of DPW in 1998.
3.  The Second Mile had a financial interest in covering up Sandusky's crimes.
4.  Louis Freeh, who was recommended by Governor Corbett, collaborated with the OAG to ensure no responsibility fell on The Second Mile, DPW, and other parties at PSU.
5. The PSU BOT is a corrupt body and also used Freeh to deflect attention away from themselves and avoid a legitimate investigation into PSU's financial dealings with Second Mile (and its members).

 John's efforts in fighting the media malpractice in this case were superlative.  Unfortunately, this is not a battle that can be won in the blogosphere or by a single individual trying to "shout down" the system.

The truth of the Sandusky scandal will ultimately be revealed by the outcomes of the judicial processes, the PA Attorney General investigation of the Sandusky investigation, and the Federal investigation of The Second Mile.

I will continue to blog here and reveal facts of the case as I find them, passing the most important of those facts to law enforcement officials.

As always, I will strive for accuracy and when I'm not accurate, I'll let you know and correct the errors.

Please join me in wishing John Ziegler the best in his endeavors.

Ray Blehar


  1. The new evidence in the V8 case is a black eye for certain but perhaps it's a gift in disguise. While the physical evidence makes the reason for Petrosky at times giving three different scenes fpr the V8 incident, this new evidence finally gives us a pat explanation for the multiple date changes Petrosky gave as well for the V8 incident, something that seems to have been lacking for the record. Petrosky's first date offerred was during the week before the Ohio State game. This was in September of 2000 and Calhoun didn't work there. OOPS. His second date was either the last week or the last weekend (I need a reminder on exactly which) in November of 2000. With no bowl game and PSU's season ending at Mich St on Nov 18, 2000, this was after PSU's season had ended. Petrosky testified that the janitors were in the Lasch building at that particular time of night so that they could "catch" Sandusky in the act because they were working the schedule they used while the team was using the Lasch Building for the football season, but the season had already ended. OOPS. So, why did the OAG settle on the timeframe being sometime during the week of Nov 11 - Nov 18, 2000 (or thereabouts)? I've never seen an adequate explanation given for that exact timeframe. Now we have one. It was within a relatively small timeframe when both Calhoun was working at PSU and the team was using the building during football season. It seems the OAG was a lot more diligent in crafting this story than we had originally believed. They weren't as entirely and completely inept at their corruption as we had led ourselves to believe and for that we can be thankful......I think.....I'm not sure.

    1. I don't think the employment dates of Calhoun (making him present at PSU) add any credibility to a story that has more holes in it that a deer crossing sign in Perry County.

      The Commonwealth finally settled on Nov 20-27, 2000 as the date range of the incident and it happening on a Thursday or Friday night of an away game.

      Football season was OVER.

      Thursday was Thanksgiving - doubtful anyone worked that night.

      Friday night - no reason to be on night shift if football was over. Janitors back on day shift.

      We saw a three year date change (originally 1998) in the Victim 5 case and the narrowing of a six year date range down to a single month (August 2001).

      Lots of fishy stuff here....for people who were only motivated to get ahead and railroad Sandusky....why change the Victim 5 date?

  2. So many questions remain in the Sandusky/ Penn State case that having your and John's investigations veer onto different paths may prove quite productive.

    I will certainly continue to follow both your efforts. My mind is open to whatever may be revealed through these investigations.

    Continuing best wishes and enormous admiration to you, Ray, and to John!! You each have a lot of support from those of us looking for truths and understanding.

  3. John Ziegler is a product of Hollywood. When I met him in Los Angeles last June, he was everything that one would expect from a documentary film maker looking for the next good scoop. He obviously thought that the media frenzy that created the incredible injustice at PSU was a godsend for him. Media malpractice was his reason for existence. He was Captain Ahab, and the media were the great white whale.

    John has a penchant for getting into pissing battles with skunks. While he never comes out smelling too good, the skunks seems to skulk away like weasels. In LA, he and director of alumni relations Dietz went at it like two twelve year old boys in a playground dispute. After that was over, I had a few words with Mr. Dietz which I am sure gave him pause.

    I told John that perhaps the legacy of Joe Paterno was a duty belonging to Joe's sons and family, who were in some ways responsible for it being trashed. As a documentary film maker, dig and scratch for the facts, but keep an arms length from what is in another's domain.

    There is one very good thing I can say for him...He takes the fight to the enemy..and in war, that is the only way to win.

  4. Ray I think separating yourself from John is not the way to go. When I worked in the corporate world we had meetings known as brain storming sessions. A topic was presented and ideas were brought forth to solve the problem. All ideas were listed, and then each idea was discussed using evidence and logic to support or destroy the idea. You and the rest on the site do that with your different ideas, including John. Do I believe that Sandusky is a pedophile? With the way Joe was railroaded, and the speed with which Sandusky went to trial, I do now have my doubts. I know for a fact that there a many on death row, and in prison who are now being shown to be innocent. The fact McQueary's victim came forward and has said that nothing happened that night, yet no one brought that up in trial is significant in my determination that Sandusky was rushed to judgement. I will continue to read any and all information that I can gather about this case, but I think taking time and raising any questions that you may have with John's ideas are a better way to go.

  5. catalacjack,
    Thanks for your suggestion.

    Two psychologist evaluated Jerry and concluded he has a psycho-sexual disorder. A trial does not determine if he is a pedophile.

    The trial determined that Jerry acted on his sexual attraction to boys and committed crimes. While the trial happened quickly, there is no question he was guilty of at least two dozen crimes that are listed under Megan's law in Pennsylvania.

    Intent + Act = Crime.

    Also, Victims 11-17 didn't get their day in court. We have also learned that Jerry was investigated in 1984 for an alleged abuse incident. And from 1984 to 1997, how many potential victims were there that we have not heard from.

    Jerry was found guilty and lost two appeals. Let his lawyers and John fight that fight if that's how they want to spend their time.

    I've laid out my five themes and that is where I will spend my time.


    1. JS was investigated in 1984?? How did he get to adopt and have foster children after that? I know how rigorous the vetting process is in get put through the ringer. The fact that the Sanduskys were vetted multiple times was a major factor in why people thought that Jerry just had boundary issues.

      It looks like the great Mike McQueary fraud is about to be exposed. After the GJ presentment, why did MM not come forward and say I did not see that, I did not say that in my testimony? Did he not have a moral obligation to do that? Why did he remain silent and let Joe Paterno and PSU get trashed? Why are the Paternos protecting him? Why did he immediately associate three random slapping sounds with sex (like a Pavlov dog)? Is he as sharp as a bowling ball like JZ thinks, or is he a pathological liar. Did he forget the month and year of the shower incident, or did he lie to help Frank Fina keep it within the statute of limitations? Why did Frank Fina throw him under the Zamboni by casting him as a big, strong man who deserted a little boy being raped? I heard the psycho-babble from Fina and Clemente trying to rationalize his behavior, but it did not compute. In fact, it made Clemente look incredibly naive (and MM is sueing PSU for defamation???).

      BTW....Kathlene Kane's report on the Grand Jury leaks is 10 months overdue. What is going on?

    2. I tend to agree with catal... The offense and defense on a football team have very different views on how to accomplish what is the common goal(winning the game). If they turn on one another, instead of focusing on what they do best, the team suffers. I view it as pushing different parts of the same big ball(up a hill on ice skates to paraphrase JZ). If we pause to scream at each other, we will be losing ground. Doubtless, in a case as complex as this one, with the self interests of so many people involved, there will be incorrect information from time to time. Ray has processed more information than ANYONE(if I had a bigger font I'd use it), and has immediately corrected any factual errors. That is more than I can say for the majority of the people involved. Different tactics than JZ? Absolutely. Different focus than JZ? Absolutely?Different opinions than JZ? Absolutely!Buying into a single opinion is what got us mired in this mess in the first place. Any team needs both offense and defense to win games. We need Ray and John(and countless others) to do what they do and allow(require) us to make up our own minds. Disagree everyone if you want, Just keep pushing whatever part of the ball you choose to push. Thank you ray for all of your effort.

    3. pkbpsu89,
      John completely disagrees with many of my themes, despite all the evidence that supports them.

      I think there is one single, fundamental difference between John and I that has voided the partnership.

      I believe that PA's child protection system was largely to blame for allowing Sandusky to molest children for over two decades and is in need of an overhaul. The Second Mile was part of that system and they also failed to protect the kids under their care.

      John does not believe DPW and Second Mile did anything wrong and that both were simply fooled by Jerry.

      Sorry, way too much evidence that shows they knew or should have known and done something to stop Sandusky.

      Numerous families and individuals who have been under-served by the system have contacted me and given me encouragement to keep pushing forward to expose the failures.

      I have two goals:
      1. Find the truth
      2. Make sure PA's children get the protection they deserve.

      This isn't a contest. The safety and well-being of children are at stake.

    4. Gregory,
      When all is said and done with AG Kane's and the Federal investigation, people will see what an abysmal failure the CPS in PA does to protect kids and how corrupt it is. It comes down to money. Sandusky was good for "business."

      As I pointed out not long ago, Sandusky was allowed access to kids after he was indicated as a child abuser by DPW in January 2009. DPW did not monitor or enforce the non-contact that was allegedly in effect after Jerry lost his clearance to work with kids.

      I'll let Don Van Natta answer your questions on Mike McQueary. I've always considered the 2001 incident a bit of a red herring and really not that important in the grand scheme of things. Just a diversion used to deflect attention away from the bigger issues.

      AG Kane's investigation is about far more than the grand jury leaks. It is a comprehensive review of the actions of the Pennsylvania State Police, OAG, DPW, and PSU related to all matters Sandusky. Her investigators are re-interviewing everyone, including the cops who were involved in the 1998 case. It will be thorough and it will answer a lot of questions.

  6. The dispositive fact is that Penn State admitted that $60 million of damage was done to 26 boys yet nobody noticed anything wrong at the time. The boys said nothing, their friends said nothing, their families, (except for the 1998 lady, said nothing. The teachers of the boys noticed nothing. The professionals working with the boys noticed nothing. Yet $60 million of harm was done! The 1998 complaint was investigated by police who wanted to get Sandusky. They hid in the house of the complaining mother as she attempted to get Sandusky to incriminate himself. McQueary never made an explicit report of a crime to anybody until he was worked over by ardent investigators.

    The problem with Mr. Blehar's analysis is that he confines himself to the hoopla in this one case. Anyone who looks at the case in the context of the 42 satanic-cult/ day-care-center cases of a couple decades ago will quickly see the Penn State case to be just another community madness case. In one of the cases children were taken from their day care center to a building in the woods where babies were murdered, dismembered, and eaten. The children were returned to the day care center where parents picked them up without noticing any trauma in the children. For some reason People believe crazy stuff.

    John Ziegler saw the injustice to Joe Paterno and was willing to let the possibility of an injustice to Sandusky pass as there probably was something wrong with Sandusky. I was thrilled when John. Ziegler finally understood that Sandusky was innocent.

    To me the case against Sandusky fell apart when one boy denied saying that he was looking forward to a house for his mother and a jeep for himself but a neighbor of the boy said, under oath, that the boy was looking forward to riches,.and that the boys claimed their fancy-pants lawyers were to help with media. Those same lawyers negotiated the $60 million settlement.

    1. WBill,
      I appreciate your tenacity and certainly you have every right to your opinion in this case, but the facts are very different than your interpretation above.

      -- "boys said nothing....families said nothing:" Obviously incorrect because the family of Aaron Fisher, the mother of Victim 6, and apparently someone in 1984 complained. Also, there are likely many others who complained between 1984 and 2008, but those complaints got silenced.

      "The teachers of boys noticed nothing." Another false statement. The facts are that the folks at Fisher's High School noticed a lot of things that should have been reported, but like many others in this case let it slide because of all the "good" Sandusky was doing.

      "The police wanted to get Sandusky." Ronald Schreffler indeed wanted to get Sandusky and was absolutely correct in his desire to charge Sandusky with lesser offenses. Schreffler had Sandusky on six to nine counts of sex offenses.

      I considered the possibility of Sandusky's innocence and weighed the facts of the case, as well as his behaviors.

      The verdict was an remains, Sandusky is GUILTY.

    2. Ray - What about the 1984 incident Fina referred to. If he found a CYS or DPW record of that 1984 "contact with child" doesn't it mean it was a founded investigation?

      Sassano testified at the preliminary hearing that CYS and DPW have no record at all about the 1998 abuse allegation because they purge all records of reports determined to be unfounded allegations.

    3. Tim,
      Fina said they were informed about a 1984 investigation into contact with a minor but could not find police paperwork on it.

      Page 8

      Other complaints about Sandusky that predated 1998 have been noted as well. Travis Weaver went on Dr. Phil and was interviewed by NBC about his abuse in 1994 and 1995. Greg Bucceroni, who was on the show with Weaver, stated that he met Sandusky in the late 70s. While many people discount Bucceroni out of hand, I don't think his story can be ruled out.

      There are clearly connections between TSM and other charities/youth organizations in the Philly area. There are tax records showing that the Philly charity provided "grants" to TSM participants and Matt Sandusky.

    4. Ray,

      Both you and John have done great work in investigating this case. While I have never met either or you or had any idea who either of you were prior to this entire situation unfolding, it does seem just from various people's reaction that John can come across very abrasive at times, especially if he believes he is right about something.

      One thing I've struggled with in my own view of this is the believability of the victims. It seems most of the victims involved come from lower-income dysfunctional single-parent homes, which is why they were involved in TSM.
      On the one hand, the family situation the victims were in as kids make them more vulnerable to being abused since they can be more trusting to anyone showing them care and attention, whether by family members or members of the community looking out for them such as Sandusky. On the other hand, it also means they could be more willing to lie if they think it will lead to financial gain and a better life for them and the people close to them given they've probably had to struggle a lot more in life to make ends meet. The almost immediate response PSU to offer financial settlements for the victims with basically no questions ask creates a significant and valid credibility issue with the victims and the entire case against Sandusky.

      Another issue I have was the lightning fast timing with which the trial took place and how neatly the timing fit with being able to maximize exposure for the Freeh report and getting it all wrapped before the Summer Olympics (for the media) and start of the PSU school year. 7 months from the indictment to conviction for such a complex case involving 50+ counts and multiple victims just seems basically unbelievable, especially given all the changes made to the timing and location of some of the charges. Also, there is seems to be prosecutorial misconduct regarding some of the charges, especially with Victim 2 and 8, that also compromises the integrity of the entire case.

      While I do believe Sandusky was guilty of some level of abuse, I'm not sure what that level is. My question to you is do you believe Sandusky got a fair trial? And if not, how can you be so sure as to the level of his guilt?

    5. Rums,
      I'm not a member of the Superior Court or State Supreme Court. Those entities will determine the fairness of Sandusky's trial when they adjudicate his appeal.

      Given the research on teenage boys who are the victims of child sexual abuse at the hands of an adult male, it is to be expected that their versions of the abuse will not be accurate. Disclosures typically are incremental. Some will downplay what happened and others may exaggerated. In the Sandusky case, none of this was sorted out before the trial because the case was investigated by a narcotics agent and state troopers (not highly trained, experienced CSA investigators). For the most part, the victims in this case suffered some level of abuse. Not ruling out that a charlatan victim may have been included at the trial or in the settlements.

      As for Sandusky's level of guilt, who can be sure? But what is known is that 8 victims testified, 2 were unknown, and the state did not prosecute the cases of Victims 11-17. Even if Sandusky's crimes did not go beyond indecent assault, the end result would have been that Sandusky was spending the rest of his life in jail (based on the sentencing for the lesser crimes).

      Also, there are likely more victims who were not among the seventeen. While we don't know the exact level of his crimes, he did commit many crimes against these young men. He's guilty. And he's where he belongs.

  7. I think JZ has been overwhelmed by the complexities of what he stumbled into. He sort of reminds me of that British Colonel in "Bridge over the River Kwai" who went bananas when he realized that his masterpiece was about to be blown to pieces.

    Yes, Reykovitz was derelict in his duty to protect kids after his talk with Curley. JS seemed to be dormant for 4 years after that, so maybe something was done.

    During the recent wrongful death suit by the Jackson family, local stations replayed excerpts from MJ's two pedophilia investigations. Jackson's daughter was teased relentlessly by classmates about her father sleeping naked with 12 year old boys. She allegedly attempted suicide. The most memorable moment was MJ saying " what's wrong with that...It was so innocent". MJ, his family, and his fans seem to have no concept that what he did was inappropriate...just like Jerry and Dottie. His mother rejects any idea that her son was a pedophile. I thought that the Santa Barbara DA had MJ by the balls...but the jury decided that the kids' parents pimped their kids out for a big payday, and MJ walked. And his fans from all over the world sang and danced in the street outside the courthouse.

  8. As the originator of this weblog I have something to say at this point after removing myself from active participation about a year ago. Although I had no connection whatever to Penn State or the situation there I became actively involved as a true outsider from the very beginning. I had recently lost/sold my business in the aftermath of the financial meltdown and had some time on my hands. The first press conference by then Atty General Linda Kelly and the initial reaction of the press struck me as inexcusable and I did not care for Joe Paterno or his support of "conservative" Republican politics. It would have been normal for me to applaud the downfall of Paterno. It all seemed so wrong to me and so bizarre that the Republican power structure in Pennsylvania would set out to devour one of it's own strong supporters.
    I asked Ray Blehar to join me after being introduced to him by a reader of the website. I am so very glad he accepted and I very much enjoyed our working relationship despite our political differences. At the same time I 'met' John Ziegler by telephone and email and despite being even more opposed to his politics I was glad to join with him and my political allies Mark Rubin and Walter Uhler in the Framing Paterno collective effort to get to the TRUTH. Working with John was never easy but it was productive.
    A year ago after many months of 60 hour weeks being totally consumed by the effort I finally succumbed to a serious weariness. The Freeh Fiction and the interminable delays in the trials of Tim Curley and Gary Schultz coupled with the lack of any momentum toward what I would consider to be a positive outcome, made it impossible for me to continue as I had so I decided on my own to take a break. I thought that break would be a matter of a few weeks or a month or two - it has turned into a year of silence and withdrawal from the fray.
    Watching from the wings I have been extremely satisfied that what I started was in the best of hands with Ray Blehar and the Freedom Fighters. Their efforts - particularly Ray's and Eileen's have been a source of pride and gratification that I had started something worthwhile that was lasting despite my absence.
    I have never thanked Ray for what he has done to continue the effort and I want to correct that oversight here and now. Ray Blehar deserves all of the credit and support. His efforts to get at the truth coupled with his remarkable abilities are evident in the meticulous analysis he has applied to this situation and offered to anyone who wants to know the facts. If Ray believes it's time to part company with John I can only support that 100%. Ray would not do it if it were not the best thing to do at this point. I have been trying to catch up with the situation as it now stands in order to offer my services to Ray in any way he might find beneficial and I wish John Ziegler all the best in his efforts as well. There is obviously a long way to go with this effort to get the TRUTH out and set the record straight.

    1. Thank you, Barry Bozeman.

      Penn Staters are forever indebted to you, a Tennessee Vol, for taking up the fight from the get go.....the very beginning when Kelly lied at her press conference.

      Welcome back!

    2. Thanks Ray,
      Please give me a call when you have a few minutes and let me know what I can do to help you. I am still your strongest supporters and a true believer in what you are trying to do. I am at your service.

  9. I'm engrossed in the entire Sandusky scandal and at this point consumed w/ every fact, detail, and new turn as this slow, torturous process unfolds. John Ziegler & You (Ray Blehar) have done "outstanding" work. I respect and appreicate your open letter regarding the split between the two of you. It's health, clear, and professional...
    This entire case is incredibly complicated and thus far I think the real truth and actual happenings w/ Sandusky & how scandal unfolded is a happy medium between Ziegler's opinion and yours. I love that both of you want the truth at any cost and that is the most important thing. I feel Sandusky over a long period of time was simply around too many kids inappropriately and that sends up huge Red Flags. Is he guilty of abuse I don't know...but I do know our justice system is broken and unbelievably bad things occur while seeking justice.

    Ray, after the events of this past week w/ Mike McQuery how can You defer to the ESPN analyst Don Van Natta to answer questions on Mike McQueary. Are you tired, exhausted and distracted by this portion of events? Any opinion on gambling debt, and or Sex Selfies that McQuery sent female students at PSU? What about Dranov's & Mike's Dad repeatedly direct questions to Mike McQuery asking if saw any actual sex taking place? Mandatory reporter not taking any action.... Do you and or do You not credit or discredit McQuery? and or Aaron Fisher? Thanks for the great work and I look forward to your reply.

    1. Jim,
      I think Don Van Natta, Jr. totally blew it with his piece on McQueary. I spoke to Don before he wrote it and it was my understanding the focus of the piece was to demonstrate the inconsistencies in Mike's testimony and that he was of questionable character. Well, all I can say is "FAIL."

      The editors at ESPN made a grievous error, and perhaps violated journalistic ethics, by reporting Mike was a CSA victim without his consent. Of course, that was the part of the story that the rest of the media picked up on and everything else ignored. Did I say the story was a FAIL? Yeah, I did.

      I am on the record that the 2001 incident is a DISTRACTION from the real issues at hand in the Sandusky scandal -- most importantly, that the child protection system failed in 1998 (and before) to stop a child predator. It is absolutely ludicrous to believe that one phone call that allegedly was not made by PSU enabled Sandusky's crimes. The TIMELINE of the crimes PROVES this was not the case. So, the whole 2001 incident is a red herring.

      If you want to point to any ONE failure in 2001, it's the failure of Second Mile to act. And it is clear they had a financial incentive not to act.

      Mike McQueary is an unfortunate pawn in this scandal. Had Mike dialed 9-1-1 on that February night, nothing would have changed. The system was stacked for Sandusky. Cops would have deferred to DPW and nothing would have happened. He was tracked down in 2010 not because of Sandusky, but because of Tom Corbett wanting to bring heat on Spanier.

      That anonymous e-mail tip did little more than give the OAG "cover" for being so slow to talk to Mike. The OAG (but not the investigators) knew about the 2001 incident long before that e-mail showed up. Way too many connections between TSM and the Governor's office for Corbett not to know.

      Appreciate that you follow my work. I am quite certain Kane's and the Fed's investigations will reveal much of what I've reported on this case.