In a document dated 31 January 2012, which was obtained via my investigation in November 2012, lead prosecutor Frank Fina had informed PSU officials that he "expected C & S to flip." As my blog post on 18 August revealed, the Sandusky trial transcripts indicated that the ultimate target of the OAG was Graham Spanier.
E-mails obtained by Ryan Bagwell through his RTKL efforts, provide more evidence that members of the PSU Board of Trustees -- and specifically Special Investigations Task Force Co-chairs -- Kenneth Frazier and Ronald Tomalis were included in the group who were being updated by the OAG. E-mails also reveal that the Freeh group received an update on the OAG's impending announcement of the Spanier charges.
The June 3, 2012 e-mail below indicates that Schultz had decided not to "cooperate." In other words, he had turned down a deal to "flip" on Spanier.
While some may argue that this email is discussing participation in the Freeh (fake) investigation, logic and evidence proves that was not the case. With Curley and Schultz facing charges, it was well established that they could not speak about anything pertaining to the case, thus wouldn't be considered as individuals to be interviewed by the Freeh group. Spanier, on the other hand, had reached out to the Freeh group at the beginning of the "investigation" and offered to meet with them several times.
"Since November of last year, when he resigned his presidency, he has wanted the Freeh Group to create an accurate report and has been determined to assist in any way he can," said the statement from Spanier's lawyers. They ended their four-paragraph statement by saying they remained "hopeful that truth and reason prevail."
This email erases any thought that the investigation conducted at Penn State was conducted "independently" and "in parallel" to the OAG's. Clearly, the SITF co-chairs were being kept informed of the progress of the OAG investigation.
But what about the Freeh group? Were they too being kept abreast of the OAG investigation's progress?
Freeh Group Informed of Pending Spanier ChargesOn October 31, 2012, the day before the Conspiracy of Silence presentment was released, Frank Fina called Greg Paw of the Freeh group to inform him of the pending charges. Paw emailed Fina back and asked if it could wait until the next day (Thursday, November 1st) or Friday?
Obviously, it couldn't wait because by the next day, the information that Fina was going to tell Paw would have been all over the news. Thus, Fina requested that he "call quick now?"
The Conspiracy of Silence presentment is referred to as the Freeh Report-Lite in some circles because it appears to utilize much of the same language and content from the Freeh Report. Other emails after the Sandusky conviction and the release of the Freeh Report revealed the cooperation between the Freeh group and the OAG (reported here by Ryan Bagwell). There is little doubt that the November 1st report was a collaborative effort by the Freeh team and the OAG.
The October 31st email revealed that the OAG maintained contact with the Freeh Group at least until Spanier was charged and additional charges were filed against Curley and Schultz. Fina's rather urgent message to Paw, as well as the other Bagwell emails, reveal that the two entities had formed a bond of sorts during their work together.
This email also raises the possibility that the Freeh group was billing Penn State for work outside the scope of the contract. While the final cost of the Freeh "investigation" and report was a little over $8.1 million, additional billings were received from Freeh, Sporkin, and Sullivan (FSS) after the completion of the "investigation." One has to wonder what exactly were the nature of these billings.
Perhaps someone on the BOT might request an audit?
Emails Prove Freeh Caught In Another LieThe evidence reveals that Louis Freeh has been caught in another lie regarding the independence of his "investigation" at Penn State.
From his press conference transcript:
While independent, our work was done in parallel with several other active investigations by agencies and governmental authorities, including the Pennsylvania Attorney General, Pennsylvania State Police, United States Attorney, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and U.S. Department of Education. We continuously interfaced and cooperated with those agencies and authorities. We also received assistance from the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC). As promised, we immediately turned over any relevant evidence we found to these authorities, such as the critical February 27, 2001 emails between Messrs. Spanier, Schultz and Curley.
Previously, evidence from the Moulton report and judicial proceedings revealed he lied about his team's "independent discovery" of the email evidence. Moulton's report (page 158) revealed the emails were turned over to the Pennsylvania State Police on July 7, 2011. Thus, the situation was the exact opposite of the situation stated by Freeh -- he didn't turn over evidence to the authorities; the OAG turned evidence over to him (or used the PSU legal counsel and/or the SITF as an intermediary).
Louis Freeh and FSS did not conduct a full, fair, and independent "investigation" of Sandusky's crimes occurring at Penn State. The evidence uncovered so far indicates that Freeh investigation was little more than a public relations ploy to provide the appearance of an "independent" investigation.
The majority of people, especially the media, were taken in by the ruse. However, at least one media member was not. Snigdha Prakash, wrote in Slate magazine, that the selection of Frazier to lead the SITF would result in a cover-up.
Prakash was right about a cover-up, but missed on figuring out what would be covered up. It was not PSU's role in the Sandusky scandal, but rather the Commonwealth's failure to take Sandusky off the streets in 1998.
Freeh's team was complicit in that cover-up.