Tuesday, December 29

The PA Corruption Network's Playbook

The similarities between the prosecution of Kathleen Kane and of the PSU 3 reveal the "playbook" of Pennsylvania's corruption network

Ray Blehar

The cases of current Pennsylvania Attorney General (AG) Kathleen Kane and that of former Penn State University (PSU) officials (i.e., the PSU 3) are connected by a common thread.

A group of the Commonwealth's attorneys, judges, political operatives, and their media accomplices -- hereafter referred to as the "network" -- used trumped up charges, purposely misinterpreted laws, and oversold highly dubious evidence to convict these individuals in the court of public opinion.

After examining the timelines and evidence of these cases, it appears that the network has a well defined playbook for taking out its targets and it works like this:

1.  Individuals within the network fear their own heinous acts may be exposed and publicly accuse their opponents of crimes as a means of  deflecting attention away from themselves. 

2.  The network next co-opts individuals close to the target(s) --insiders -- to assist in setting up the target(s) to be charged with perjury and other crimes.

3.  After the insiders have sufficiently undermined the targets (using various means of deception), the network's attorneys and/or judges leak damaging information about the targets to the media

4.  The media arm of the network uses the information in an attempt to compromise the targets or to promote guilt by association in the press.

5.  At the conclusion of this "framing," that was mislabeled as a criminal investigation, attorneys go public with charging documents that allege crimes based on misinterpretations of the laws and that are chocked full of questionable testimony from unreliable witnesses, completely illogical scenarios, and dubious evidence.  Perjury charges are standard in order to publicly smear the defendants as being dishonest individuals while attempting to pump up the veracity of the Commonwealth's lousy witnesses (who would be eviscerated at an actual trial).

6.  The media accomplices ignore the illegal application of relevant laws, that the charging documents are illogical, the lousy witnesses, and the highly questionable evidence in order to continue treating the allegations as facts and even go as far as to allege the target committed crimes for which he or she has not been charged.

7.  The public falls for the deception and believes the targets are guilty of everything and are corrupt individuals -- whether they have been charged with a crime or not. Citizen activists, public officials, and other groups and individuals -- who are beneficiaries of the corrupt network -- jump on the media bandwagon to publicly condemn the targets.

8.  Witting and/or unwitting employers recommend the targets be relieved of their duties or actually do so through employment actions -- before anything is proven and without conducting a legitimate legal review.  

9.  When legal proceedings in the cases reveal the false and questionable testimony put forth in the charging documents and the dubious evidence used in the case, the network's media arm ignores the information and continues to slant the reports so the public continues to assume the targets are guilty.

10.  The legal issues from the misapplications of the laws result in appeals to the network's  judges, who refused to rule on simple matters and keep the trials on permanent hold.  If the cases make it to trial, the targets will be convicted of lesser crimes -- that the media will treat like crimes of the century.

The network's playbook achieves the goal of protecting its corrupt dealings and/or heinous crimes by never legally proving, but publicly scapegoating the targets in a media firestorm that is high in supposition and light on facts.

To wit:  the grand jury and Montgomery County DA Risa Ferman did not find the evidence to charge AG Kane with directly leaking grand grand jury information in the Mondesire case, but you wouldn't know that if you just read the news headlines

Instead, they charged her with perjury (part of the playbook), lesser crimes, and for orchestrating the leaks, the latter of which Ferman and others know can't be proven.

Then again, the network's playbook doesn't necessarily include actually prosecuting the case -- because the media has already done it. 

In the following weeks, the dubious evidence used in Kane's case will be exposed, as will the details showing how the network of attorney, judges, and media worked together in an attempt to prevent AG Kathleen Kane from breaking PA's chain of corruption.


  1. This is a much-needed and concise explanation of the modus operandi used by the mobsters and thugs in PA government.

    It's been clear as day to me for quite some time. But sadly, most of the PA public has just accepted the corrupt media lies without question. We have been pitted against each other in the form of democrat vs. republican in order to distract us while the Mafioso thugs are picking our pockets and telling us lies.

    It's really not about party affiliation. It's about right and wrong, honest and dishonest, corrupt and uncorrupted. And it's also about bravery and cowardice. Those that betray the trust placed in them by the people are simply cowards. They cave in to bribes, threats, intimidation and dreams of ill-gotten wealth. And all-the-while, they proclaim themselves to be the elite. And yes, they are the elite, the criminal elite. And we are allowing them to fund their criminal elitism with our taxes. We have allowed them to falsely accuse us of crimes we did not commit. We have allowed them to divide us against each other. And we have even allowed them to sexually exploit our disadvantaged children within their institutions created to look like institutions of goodwill. When in fact, The Second Mile was most likely an example of institutionalized state-sponsored child prostitution.

    But we are not to despise our state. We are to despise those that have robbed us of our beloved state of PA. And the finger is not to be pointed at either democrat or republican. It is to be pointed at the organized crime that has infiltrated and corrupted all levels of PA government. Because PA is merely a microcosm of what is going on all throughout our nation. Our entire country is at war with corruption that wears the mask of either democrat or republican. And we can not win against corruption while we are forced into a false dichotomy that pits us against each other.

    We must thank God everyday for the few brave ones like Attorney General Kathleen Kane that are trying to expose these officials that have so maliciously betrayed our trust. She is in the fight of her life for our sake. And had she been a coward, she could have just walked away.

    1. Truthseeker,
      Thank you for your very well written comment. I agree with you for the most part, though I wouldn't say that Fina, Williams, Feudale, Eakin, and others are members of organized crime. I believe they are providing smokescreens and legal help for it to continue its control of the state of PA.


    2. Seeker,
      Your passion for justice is awesome. Your points are well taken. I only disagree with you on Jerry Sandusky's guilt. I'm sorry if it offends you or anyone else, but I have to state what I feel is true. The funny thing is, Ray could have been writing this article in describing the circus that was the Sandusky trial. I posted the following entry today on another story that was commented on a week ago. I am reposting it here because I feel it applies.
      Why is someone "convicted" in an obvious corrupt system definatley "guilty as sin", but those accused in that same system definatley innocent? My opinion is they are all innocent! Let's face it, this whole mess has ruined all of our lives in some way. Obviously some way more than others. But we all have had a piece of our soul taken from us which is why we continue to discuss and sometimes argue about this travesty. My view is that those in power accused innocent people in order to either puff their chest, hide something or just make money and do business as usual. Government, media and corruption go hand in hand and will never stop. That bridge has long been crossed and there is no going back. If you think you are going to change it by blogging, you are misguided. They chose to steal our souls because they can. We all had something special at PSU. A special university with a special man who had a vision unlike most others and transformed a university into a model of higher learning thru his actions, in one of the most corrupt entities (college sports and sports in general) to ever exist. He showed things could be done the right way and his actions trickled down to administrators, who took the fall with him and made them better professionals and people and I'm pretty sure they would agree with that statement. I admire and respect all of your posts and although I don't always agree with them I appreciate that you all are going through the same heart ache that I am. I ask you all please, if you have any real concrete evidence that Jerry Sandusky is guilty, other than hersay, would you please post it. Most people convicted of crimes such as these are found to have lots of hard evidence pointing to their guilt. I would love to see some in this case other than hersay and victims who stories are vague and don't make a lot of sense, not to mention those "paid" victims who have contradicted their accusations by doing interviews to the contray and actually putting those same thoughts from the police interviews on paper and documenting them through a media outlet. I ask you all to please use the same scrutiny and passion that you have used for Joe and the PSU 3 to really examine the Sandusky case with an open mind. Just put yourself in that position and apply everything and tell me how you would feel if it was you in that jail. There has been corruption, raping and pillaging and witch hunts through out human history. Why do we think that in the last hundred years or so, we have become so civilized that humans would not stoop to these evil levels anymore. Our human history continues to repeat itself in more modern ways and this episode is no different. I wish you all a healthy and happy new year! God Bless! We Are!

    3. Scott, there is a man that has posted here on this page today. His name is Greg Bucceroni, and he states that a "Coach Jerry" was abusing him as a child in the 70s and 80s. Why don't you ask him here if he thinks this "Coach Jerry" is Jerry Sandusky? Mr. Bucceroni alleges that this abuse took place within the Second Mile's programs for boys.

      Also, why would the corrupt network expose specific information like 'hard evidence' that would lead back to them? That's why the conviction of Jerry Sandusky seemed rushed. No suspension of Jerry or mounting evidence documented within the media over the years, just altered or missing reports buried deep within the corrupt state government. The corrupt PA media kept Second Mile and Sandusky out of sight from the public. And faux-Governor Tom Corbett has enabled this abuse of children for over a decade. Yet he tried to paint himself as a hero by sending Sandusky to jail ten years too late. Like I said before, Corbett sacrificed Sandusky in the end to save his own skin. It's hard to believe people like Risa Vetri Ferman representing the government corruption, and John L. Micek, representing the corrupt media are still trying to flog their dying horse of corruption. I suppose they aren't bright enough to know when to quit.

    4. Scott,
      Jerry Sandusky's own words were used in his conviction. Jerry admitted to being in bed with a fifteen year old boy, pulling the boy on top of him, rubbing the boy's back, and blowing raspberries on the boys stomach. When asked if his hands went below the boy's waist, Sandusky stated he couldn't honestly say whether they did or they didn't.

      The victim in that incident testified that Jerry's hands went below his waist and that Sandusky performed oral sex on him (and vice versa). Please picture a man blowing raspberries on another man or boy's stomach. Now picture a man performing oral sex. Any doubt that Sandusky was NOT performing oral sex -- based on the evidence I've written here -is CAPRICIOUS doubt. It is not reasonable doubt.

      Beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard in the United States. Absolute proof is not required.

      Next, Sandusky admitted to showering naked with boys and to hugging them while naked. When questioned, in 1998, whether or not his genitals made contact with the boys, Sandusky gave the answer "I don't think so... maybe." Again, a non-definitive answer.

      When Sandusky was questioned by Bob Costas and Jo Becker about whether or not he was attracted to young boys, again Sandusky could not give a direct answer.

      It is clear from the evidence in this case that Sandusky was sexually attracted to boys and he acted on that attraction. After being told by police not to shower with boys, he continued to do so.

      In summary, those who believe Sandusky is innocent simply are using a standard of determining guilt that is beyond the legal requirement AND are not fully aware of the facts of the case.

      Finally, as an analyst and investigator, I reviewed the evidence that was used to determine Jerry's guilt. As you are probably aware, I found some that was not legitimate and I found some that was. However, the problems with Jerry Sandusky's trial were ALL ABOUT ensuring that PENN STATE was convicted in the court of public opinion as the trial's by product. They were not significant in terms of Sandusky's guilt.

    5. Seeker,
      Thanks for the response. I appreciate the info. I feel you may be a lot more connected to information than I am. I've been reading and listening as much as I can for four miserable years from every angle I can access. I would just like to see a retrial for Mr. Sandusky with full discovery and truth (at least as much as you can get in this world). Too many unturned stones for me to accept putting a man away for life.
      And for Mr. Bucceroni who posted below, and I don't mean to talk as if you are in the room and I'm ignoring you, so please respond if you are reading this. Again, I do not want to offend or argue with him but could he please give us a little more detail than nicknames. Again it all seems vague to me. No disrespect, maybe Im too thick to understand it, but I feel that if this happen to him he should be heard and compensated. There should be no limitations of time to claim abuse. It never goes away. It's happened in my family and I've seen the repercussions first hand. If you can not say more legally, I understand, but if you can and you have concrete information, why not tell the world on line. Screw the bought and paid for media. I wish you peace man, as
      I also would love to just have some peace and truth in all this. I realize I'm not a victim but as I said in a previous post, we have all been deeply affected by this. And it's eventual outcome will define our lives and our freedoms. What happened at PSU is a microcosm of our whole political and societal system. If it is allowed to continue through out the country and the world no one will be free anymore. Thanks again for the response and I pray none of my words are too offensive because they are not meant to be. At times I have let my emotions get the best me and expressed myself a little too aggressively and for that I apologize. I'm just trying to find my own peace in all of this. Happy New Year and God bless!!

    6. Scott,
      Jerry Sandusky is highly unlikely to get a new trial. As for Jerry being put away for life, you can look at it this way. His sentence will be SHORTER than the time he spent freely abusing children. Is that really justice or a fair trade?

      As for stones unturned, the Commonwealth could have presented at least 8 more victims at the trial. Most assuredly, some of those victims would have more horrifying stories than some of the stories heard at trial. It is clear that the victims were selected to put the focus on PSU, not necessarily make the best case against Sandusky.

      If you have read the evidence in Sandusky's appeal, it indicates a possible child sex trafficking network that reached Philadelphia. Again, this is in Sandusky's appeal documents. The documents show that cars and money were provided to Second Mile kids -- apparently for "no reason" (according to the victim).

      If this network exists, and it provides child sex trafficking to government officials, then you can see why PSU would be scapegoated for Sandusky's crimes.

      Happy New Year to you and yours.

    7. Based on the beyond a reasonable doubt standard, I don't see how Sandusky got a fair trial particularly for the two unidentified victims. The fact that those two victims never testified is reasonable doubt in itself.

      Sandusky seemed to have an inept defense. They failed to raise key objections that lost Sandusky the right to appeal on key issues.

      They failed to take advantage of opportunities, particularly the perjury by the two state police investigators and the prosecution lying about not knowing the identity of victim 2. The defense should have called victim 2 as a witness and accused the prosecution of lying to the court. That might have been a mistrial right there.

    8. Tim,
      A trial's fairness isn't determined on how the jury weighed the evidence.

      I've written ad nauseum about the prosecution's (and defense's) reasons for deciding AM was not a credible witness. The motion Lindsay made that the prosecution knew that AM was V2 was preposterous based on the evidence Lindsay provided in the PCRA exhibits. The prosecution said exactly the same thing in its response back to Lindsay.

      So, for the sake of argument, let's say V2 & V8 are eliminated from the trial. Sandusky still gets convicted on 34 counts. Neither the V2 nor the V8 incidents were critical in influencing how the jury voted. The most critical witness, according to the jurors, was V4.

      Happy New Year, Tim. Thanks for following and commenting on the blog. I appreciate it very much.

    9. Hi Ray,
      Thank you for the response and the article and of course the web site and all you've done in this matter. I'm not absolutely sure, but I think the victim you are referring to in your first couple of paragraphs might be Aaron Fisher. If I am correct, then I'm sorry but I've read and heard too much about him and his Mother to take him seriously. If I'm wrong about them then I apologize, but I can't lie and honestly say I believe them because my senses tell me not to. As far as my doubt of Jerry Sandusky ever performing oral sex being "Capricious"? The dictionary on my IPhone defines "Capricious" as "given to sudden and unaccountable changes of mood or behavior". Now there may be other definitions but I wouldn't know because I've never heard of that word before today. But by the definition in my phone it doesn't seem to make sense in that context? But I will say that if you are talking about Aaron Fisher then he grew up about 25 miles from where I grew up and he was a wrestler I believe. I don't know too many 15 year old males from our area that would have let a 60 year old man aggressively grope and perform oral sex on them without one heck of a fight and probably wouldn't lose that fight, especially a kid that wrestled. And I've never said I needed absolute proof of his guilt. But I have asked if you and everyone else are 100% sure he is guilty. As far as what Jerry said in interviews, we have concluded by now that Jerry is not an average ordinary man. He doesn't communicate his thoughts very well unless you ask him about a 3-4 defense or something else he has passion about, but he had no business being on TV answering questions after being indicted on 48 counts of child sexual abuse!! Which just shows the poor lawyering he received. Even an extremely intellectual person would have a difficult time coming off as believable and innocent in that setting whether they were guilty or not. Ray, you know the law way better than me but I didn't think you could be convicted on what you said on a TV show or in an interview conducted by two detectives 14 years prior to your trial, but I might be wrong. To be cont.

    10. Continued from above......I'll admit Jerry showering with young boys (although not as young as testified to in some instances) is weird and wrong and even taking into account the culture and times he grew up in, he obviously should not have been doing that with the child in 1998 who I believe was 11. I'm just not sure that makes him a phedophile, but maybe extremely stupid and reckless. But him not giving a decisive answer does not make him guilty. (He should have been punished for it then, but life in prison?) But the McQuerrey incident was not showering with a young small child. He was showering with a fourteen year old boy who played football in an athletic setting who was practically a son to him. Anybody who has followed this closely knows that to be true and probably knows of the deceit that that same child/man performed on Jerry while flipping on him for money.
      Your last paragraph in your response is the most interesting. You claim to have reviewed the evidence with some being worthy and some not which makes me wonder why that doesn't give you at least some doubt of his guilt? But I do agree that the trial was used to destroy PSU. The whole scandal was used to destroy PSU. This is why I feel a re-trial is necessary. It would give the opportunity for discovery which may eventually prove what we all know to be true about Joe and the PSU 3 and would exonerate them in front of the whole world and maybe we would even learn more about Jerry good or bad. Personally I hope it goes to federal court as they may be more likely to be removed from the corruption in Pa. and wanting to puff their chest out and take people below them down. Their putrid existence and system may benefit us in the end. Or we just might get it in the end as usual.
      If there is no re-trial I feel they will eventually drop the charges against the PSU 3 and this story will slip quietly into history with their lives destroyed, Joe Paterno's legacy destroyed and a huge black mark on PSU that will never fade away. Game over, they (Corbett, Fina, McGettigan, Surma, Frazier, Freeh, Emmerett, Erickson and on and on) win as usual.
      Wow, I wrote all that and went to publish and saw your and Tim's responses to my earlier post to truthseeker. First of all, thank you Tim for your response, I agree with all of it. Ray, you are privy to so much more than us or at least you are smarter and better at finding it. The things you speak of seem surreal and hard to stomach, but I still feel that Jerry could have been scapegoated just like and along with PSU. He is an extremely easy mark with some odd incidents in the past that would fit the story nicely. I'm sorry, I might be a total idiot, but something is just not right about this thing from AF to AM to the courts and the state government and the PSU administration and board. If it doesn't go back to the courts in some fashion it is all over and our fate is sealed in history and I'm not happy about it!!
      Again, Ray, I appreciate everything you have done and I hope I do not offend when I disagree with you. I hope we can agree to disagree on some things and enlighten each other on others, you doing most of the enlightening, of course.
      I wish you and yours a blessed and happy new year!!

      And thanks for listening and responding. It's very therapeutic!

    11. Scott,
      First, the victim in the McQueary incident is UNKNOWN. The person (AM) who came forward stating he was with Jerry in the shower lied about that, his association with Second Mile, and a lot of other things. Phone records show Jerry and Dottie called him eleven times between August and November 2011, undoubtedly trying to get him to come forward an lie for Jerry. If AM wasn't abused, why would he be reluctant to come forward? So AM isn't credible - and he isn't Victim 2.

      Next, Jerry Sandusky CONFIRMED the initial abuse allegations of Aaron Fisher. That's why Clinton County CYS made an abuse finding in January 2009. So, Fisher isn't the liar people are trying to say he is. He THREATENED to walk away from the case in the Summer of 2010, so he wasn't in it for the money.

      As for Jerry being sexually attracted to boys, his own behavior proved that because after being told by police to stop showering with boys, he continued to do so. He also admitted to being IN BED with Aaron Fisher. Who, besides a child molester, gets in bed with (unrelated) children? Finally, at the trial, his own expert witness, Dr. Elliot Atkins, testified that Jerry had Histrionic Personality Disorder, which is a mental disorder associated with pedophilia. So, no, Jerry isn't just a weird guy, he's a pedophile.

      Jerry is guilty, however, the ugly truth is that he probably wasn't the only child molester who was using the kids at Second Mile for sexual gratification. Was Jerry "scapegoated" to protect other child molesters? I'd say that is highly probable because the AG avoided investigating Second Mile. That's why I believe that former AG officials are corrupt. They are letting this stuff go on.

      Sandusky getting retried - and found guilty again - doesn't solve anything. I am very comfortable with the outcome of the first trial in terms of getting the overall verdict right. The AG fabricated the Victim 8 incident to damage PSU -- Sandusky isn't serving any jail time for that incident. The prosecutors who did that should be disbarred.

      The FBI manual on child abuse investigations is rather clear that some charlatan victims will sneak their way into high profile cases as a means to get money. There is one instance of that happening in Sandusky's case. But looking at the big picture, Jerry abused 7 of the 8 victims who testified at the trial.

      The PSU 3 case is much more important in changing perceptions but, like you, I don't think it will ever go to trial.

      The review of the Freeh source materials by the alumni trustees, the Paterno lawsuit, Spanier's defamation suit, and other ongoing investigations will eventually correct the record.

      I agree that it is therapeutic to discuss this stuff. The public needs to be educated about child molesters and it may have to happen one person at a time.

      Happy New Year.

    12. Scott,
      Didn't see the post was continued from above.

      If you google "capricious doubt" you will see it is used in a lot of legal texts and it's usage is in contrast to "rational" or "sensible" thought.

      Next, your understanding of how Aaron Fisher should react to Sandusky's advances shows that you do not understand the concept of grooming victims to become compliant. Sandusky would identify a victim at a very young age (Fisher was 10), before they really understood anything about sex and begin touching them in a "loving" way. As part of the mind game, Sandusky would tell the kids that touching was special and a secret to be kept between them. As Fisher got to his mid-teens, he realized this was not normal and began distancing himself from Sandusky. That is typically what happened between Sandusky and Victims 4 and 9. Victim 3 moved away to a foster home and didn't go through this "break up" with Jerry. Read Ken Lanning's manual on child molester behavior. What Jerry did was very typical and so were the reactions of the kids.

      If you read Lanning's manual, you'll see that Jerry was a child molester -- and that his wife Dottie very much fits the profile of a wife of a child molester/pedophile.

    13. Ray,

      Thank you very much for the response, it's a lot to take in. I will take your advice on the Lanning's manual.
      I've read this site for around 4 years and I have followed John Ziegler's site also for that same time period. (I'm sure that is evident, by some of my opinions) I know you and John worked together for a while and have had a falling out. I use your site's to help me try to understand this whole thing and have spoken to John via email n text also. I find that you both make some very valid points. Your investigating is amazing and you have written so many informative articles that I have used to shape my opinion on this matter. But at the same time, John has produce some pretty interesting material that has caused my doubt about Jerry's guilt. The contrast in your opinions on the same subject is interesting, but leaves me feeling empty sometimes. I feel like this saga is just going to fade away with the narrative as is, which is a horrible thought. If not a trial for Jerry, then a trial for somebody, please!! Let some truth come out some way some how. As we stand now, this story is dead. And if you ask John Doe in 5 or 10 years who Joe Paterno is, my fear is the answer will be, "oh, he's that old coach who raped little boys". The thought of one of the most important figures in my and my family's lives being falsely slandered for eternity is extremely depressing.
      I guess only time will tell if we ever find out the whole truth. Thanks again Ray for everything! And may the new year bring TRUTH! We Are! Success With Honor!

    14. Scott,
      I believe there will always be haters out there who will say that about Paterno, but if you look at what has happened since 2012, many people's positions on Joe have changed.

      Check out this video from Rick Pitino.


      Last year, pundit Chris Matthews said Paterno's reputation was going to be restored.

      Don't let the haters get you down.

      Take care.

  2. Could not help but think of Pennsylvania while watching corruption play out in almost real time in Netflix documentary "Making a Murderer." Must see.

  3. Ray thanks for writing what I was feeling. What are the chances of proving your thoughts above? This all leads back to Corbutt in my opinion. Will the evidence that comes out with the Kane proceedings rise to the level of proof?

    It seems to me that there was never an intent to have a trial for CSS. Are they waiting for the most recent Sandusky appeal to be denied before they drop the charges against CSS? What are the chances the CSS takes action against the State for false prosecution? Can Kane sue for false prosecution?

    1. Nicholas,
      Thanks for your comment and questions.

      Obviously, I can't "prove" anything. That is a matter for the courts. All I can do is present evidence to support my theory on the network and I can certainly show evidence to support many of the steps of the playbook. You can judge whether or not the evidence is convincing.

      Is there enough evidence to convict Kane? Probably not. Stay tuned -- because that is what I will show over the next few weeks.

      Beemer is running the case against C/S/S, so I doubt he'll drop the charges. Filings from the attorneys for C/S/S have complained of prosecutorial misconduct. I am not a lawyer, but it appears that you have to be exonerated before you can file lawsuits related to being falsely charged/prosecuted.

  4. I've been saying this since 2011 thru 2015. It is this corrupt network of a group of the Commonwealth's attorneys, judges, political operatives, their media accomplices and sordid law enforcement officials that have conspired since 2011 to throw off investigations into the 2nd Mile Charity scandal associated with child sex trafficking related crimes regionally. I remember back in September 2012 when this sordid network of scoundrels conspired to discredit my allegations via The Philadelphia Daily News and misleading journalist Bill Bender and Sara Ganim regarding a child sex trafficking ring associated to the 2nd Mile Charity and various sordid prominent people within Pennsylvania's 'Good Old Boys Network" with strong ties to the Philadelphia metro area. Thru professional therapy my memories of abuse are focused and have remained the same since I have been able to focus long buried memories into a timeline of abuse and exploitation between the years 1976-1980 which included "Who, What, Where, When and How". FYI between the years 1976-1980 many of the prominent abuse offenders that were associated to the child sex trafficking network were only known by first names or nicknames for the most part; thru professional therapy, internet investigations and recent events in the news media since 2011 many of the sordid offenders previously known only by first names or nicknames ie (Coach Jerry, Coach Phil, Richie, Fat Tom, Fast Eddie, Scott, Denny, Fat Chucky, etc) have been identified with their full names, facial recognition & professional profiles. I fully stand by my allegations and will go toe to toe with any scoundrel that attempts to wrongfully discredit my allegations via "Smoke & Mirrors"

    1. Thank you, Greg.

      The evidence is starting to come out about this network. I have some additional leg work to do before I write about some of its Philly/NJ connections.

  5. What I don't understand in these sham prosecutions is that Kathleen Kane has been supporting the sham prosecution of the PSU 3 for nearly three years, even after she became the victim of a sham case against her.

    Why did Kane continue Fina's bogus case against the PSU 3 if she wanted to break "PA's chain of corruption?"

    1. Tim,
      Shortly after Kane took office she wrote two memos that put Bruce Beemer in charge of the cases of Curley and Schultz (combined) and Spanier (separate). Since that time the cases have all been merged, but the point is that Beemer has responsibility for those cases.

      Kane met with Beemer shortly after being sworn in and Beemer told her the cases were strong. Kane trusted Beemer's word and repeated his statements about the strong case against the PSU 3 to the media.

      Looking back at what has transpired, I'm sure Kane regrets that she didn't do her own research into the cases (or read mine!).

      Happy New Year!

    2. Ray - Kane's employees lying to her could be part of her problems but she also seemed to make a lot of blunders on her own.

      It was unwise to feed dirt on her political foes to news reporters, unwise to get facts wrong in press conferences and be forced to publicly retract and unwise to delay a full scale investigation of the porn emails.

      Politics can be very dirty, so Kane would likely have been better off getting rid of all the GOP loyalists on her staff.

      Given that Kane's main campaign issue was the delays in the Sandusky case, she certainly should have become an expert in that case as well as the closely related PS3 case.

    3. Tim,
      I agree she should have dumped Beemer, Barker, and others when she took over, but it is likely that she believed that she needed to keep the people on who were working the PSU 3 case.

      You are also correct that Kane should have just let Moulton do the talking about the Sandusky investigation, although it is NOT TRUE that Kane retracted the FACT that two children were abused during the Sandusky investigation. The retraction that she made was that she was wrong that neither of the incidents were prosecuted. She corrected that to say one of the two incidents went to trial.

      I don't think porngate is the thing that will take Fina down...but I believe Gansler's investigation will take him down.

  6. Tim, is she compromised? We voted her in not to be compromised. Is she facing odds? I want to believe in her.

    1. Bob,
      Kane isn't "compromised" in terms of being corrupt, but the AG staff that she kept on after taking office appear to be part of the network.

      It was a mistake by her not to clean house. I also believe she got some really bad advice about who she should put on her staff.

  7. #UPMCrecycles