Thursday, January 23

Diary Entries Point to 2001 Email Fraud

The McChesney diary entries add to the evidence the that Freeh's team tampered with a 2001 email to implicate Paterno and Spanier

Ray Blehar
January 23, 2020, 10:45 AM EST

A series of entries in the McChesney diary combined with court documents make the case that Freeh's team tampered with the February 27-28, 2001 email to implicate former legendary football coach Joe Paterno and former PSU President Graham Spanier.

The critical diary entries show that the 1998 emails were discovered separately from the 2001 emails and that the Freeh's team provided only the 2001 emails.   OAG prosecutor Frank Fina remarked that he'd have to "establish the right chain of custody" for those emails.  Fina is currently facing disciplinary action for misleading the court in the Spanier case. 

Court documents prove that the 1998 and 2001 emails were discovered simultaneously in an email archive belonging to PSU former VP of Business and Finance, Gary Schultz.

The McChesney diary entries are evidence that the purported "forensic" discovery of the 1998 and 2001 emails by Freeh's team was part of a ruse by Fina to frame Curley, Schultz, and Spanier for conspiracy to obstruct justice. 

February 27, 2012: "PSP has Schultz emails"  
March 7, 2012:  "Have emails that indicate that Paterno knew about 98 incident..."

Freeh's purported discovery of the 1998 and 2001 emails happened on March 20, 2012.

March 22, 2012:  "State computer person & AG found 2001 emails, PWC writing report a to validity of emails..."
March 30, 2012:   "State hasn't turned over 2001 emails to Amendola, waiting til they have the right chain of custody within the next few days."
March 31, 2012: "AG has emails (we knew that GP provided)."

GP is a reference to Freeh's lead investigator, Greg Paw.

There was no legitimate purpose for the Freeh team to be providing the 2001 emails to Fina, but it's apparent now that there was an illegitimate one.

Their purpose was to fabricate evidence to implicate Paterno as the key decision maker regarding 2001 and to support failure to report and endangerment charges against Spanier.

The diary shows that Lanny Davis was apparently unsatisfied with the PWC authentication report and wanted the confirmation of PSU's IT expert, John Corro.

April 5, 2012: "Lanny Davis:  Wants to track this through Corro, wants to note Paterno quotes in email v. What Paterno said;"

There are no diary entries showing that Corro authenticated the documents.  Davis disappeared from the diary entries shortly after making the authentication request.

Beginning in 2013 and thereafter, Notpsu reported (and gave public presentations) detailing that the visible  html code came as result of tampering with the email and that the passage "after talking it over with Joe"sentence was added to the email.  The &nbsp (non-breaking space) notation after that sentence is the "smoking gun" because it signifies a single space break after a period.  Curley typed using double spaces. Spanier and Schultz did not.

There is no smoking gun evidence to prove that "we then become vulnerable for not reporting it" was interjected, however the fact that Fina didn't charge Spanier with failure to report child abuse at the same time as Curley and Schultz provides the circumstantial evidence.  Fina possessed the original email in April 2011

That wasn't the only email subject to tampering by Freeh's team.

Freeh Report Exhibit 5H has the same html coding interspersed. While there are no obvious signs of interjected language, it is notable that none of the "&nbsp" notations are present in Curley's typing

The Freeh Report contained six 2001 emails and the two mentioning Spanier had formatting problems.  The other four were properly formatted.

In another instance, Freeh did not include the complete email chain in order to support his assertion that Curley met with The Second Mile on March 19th.  Exhibit 5I is a March 7, email from Joan Coble to Curley asking if he closed the loop on the 2001 action plan about Sandusky.

Coble testified that she closed the action upon the response from Curley.  Here's the rest of the email chain.

The diary entries reveal that the Freeh team possessed the Schultz file and the 2001 emails, therefore the possible reasons for not including the full email are either incompetency or dishonesty or both.

Freeh's track record supports "both."

In December 2019, the FBI was implicated in altering an email in order to (illegally) obtain a FISA warrant on a U.S. citizen.  Based on this finding, Notpsu wrote a history of similar abuses of evidence by Freeh during his tenure as FBI director.

Shortly after the release of the Freeh Report, news hit the street that Freeh's conclusion of bribery in the FIFA case were overturned by the sport's governing body because his investigators failed to trace the money.

In the aftermath of the BP Horizon settlement case, Paw confirmed that the Freeh group used an entirely inaccurate recounting on a witness interview to accuse Christine Reitano of crimes.

Former Department of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, rebutted Freeh's conclusions in the Wynn-Okada case for using documents of dubious provenance (among other deficiencies).

Freeh is currently facing scrutiny for conflict of interest in the Volkswagen emissions case.

It's long past time that the former FBI director's destructive practices be put to and end.

Coming soon....

Chain of Custody Never Established For Emails

The Incredible Shrinking Schultz File

1 comment:

  1. The corruption within the FBI, especially at the upper levels, should be an eye opener to anyone seeking justice. These credentialed men no longer have my trust.