Federal Agent: No Sex Scandal At Penn State, Just A "Political Hit Job


EOG Dedicated


EOG Dedicated

Sandusky Seeks New Trial Based On Fina-Freeh Collusion, Leaks

Kathleen McChesney
By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

Lawyers for Jerry Sandusky have filed a motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence that documents rampant collusion between the criminal investigation of the Penn State sex scandal conducted by the state attorney general's office and the supposedly independent $8 million civil investigation of PSU presided over by former FBI Director Louis Freeh.

Throughout the Freeh investigation, which was the legal basis for the NCAA's unprecedented sanctions imposed against Penn State that included a record $60 million fine, there were "substantial communications" between the AG's office and Freeh's investigators, the motion states. Those communications included a steady stream of leaks to Freeh's investigators emanating from the supposedly secret grand jury probe overseen by former Deputy Attorney General Frank Fina, a noted bad actor in this case.

The collusion and leaks between the AG's office and the Freeh Group are documented in three sets of confidential records filed under seal by Sandusky's lawyers; all those records, however, were previously disclosed on Big Trial. The records include a private 79-page diary kept by former FBI Special Agent Kathleen McChesney, the co-leader of the Freeh investigation, in 2011 and 2012; a seven-page "Executive Summary of Findings" of a 2017 confidential review of the Freeh Report conducted by seven Penn State trustees; and a 25-page synopsis of the evidence gleaned by the trustees in 2017 after a review of the so-called "source materials" for the Freeh Report still under judicial seal.

In documents filed Saturday in state Superior Court, Sandusky's lawyers argued in their motion for a new trial that the collusion that existed between the AG and Freeh amounted to a "de facto joint investigation" that not only violated state law regarding grand jury secrecy, but also tainted one of the jurors who convicted Sandusky.

Juror 0990

According to the motion for a new trial, "Juror 0990" was a Penn State employee who was interviewed by Freeh's investigators before she was sworn in as a juror at the Sandusky trial.

"At no time during this colloquy, or any other time, did the prosecution disclose that it was working in collaboration with the Freeh Group which interviewed the witness," lawyers Philip Lauer and Alexander Lindsay Jr. argue in the 31-page motion filed on Sandusky's behalf.

At jury selection, Joseph Amendola, Sandusky's trial lawyer, had no knowledge "about the degree of collaboration" ongoing between the AG's office and Freeh investigators, Sandusky's appeal lawyers wrote. Had he known, Amendola stated in an affidavit quoted in the motion for a new trial, Amendola would have "very likely stricken her for cause, or at a minimum, used one of my preemptory strikes to remove her as a potential juror."

Had he known the AG and Freeh Group were working in tandem, Amendola stated in an affidavit, he would have also quizzed all other potential jurors about any interaction with investigators from the Freeh Group. And he "would have sought discovery of all materials and statements obtained by the Freeh Group regarding the Penn State/Sandusky investigation."

Coercive Tactics By Freeh's Investigators

In their motion for a new trial, Sandusky's lawyers describe the hardball tactics employed by Freeh's investigators as detailed in a seven-page June 29, 2018 report from the Penn State trustees who investigated the so-called source materials for the Freeh Report. In their report, seven trustees state that "multiple individuals have approached us privately to tell us they were subjected to coercive tactics when interviewed by Freeh's investigators."

"Investigators shouted, were insulting, and demanded that interviewees give them specific information," the seven trustees wrote, such as, "Tell me that Joe Paterno knew Sandusky was abusing kids!"

"Some interviewees were told they could not leave until they provided what the interviewers wanted, even when interviewees protested that this would require them to lie," the trustees wrote. Some individuals were called back by Freeh's investigators for multiple interviews, where the same questions were repeated, and the interviewees were told they were being "uncooperative for refusing to untruthfully agree with interviewers' statements."

"Those employed by university were told their cooperation was a requirement for keeping their jobs," the trustees wrote. And that being labeled "uncooperative" by Freeh's investigators was "perceived as a threat against their employment."

Indeed, the trustees wrote, "one individual indicated that he was fired for failing to tell the interviewers what they wanted to hear."

"Coaches are scared of their jobs," the trustees quoted another interviewee as saying.

"Presumably," Sandusky's lawyers wrote, as a Penn State employee, "Juror number 0990 was subject to this type of coercion."

Sandusky's Lawyers Seek To Depose Freeh, Fina

In their motion for a new trial, Sandusky's lawyers ask the Superior Court for permission to conduct an evidentiary hearing so that Sandusky's lawyers could learn the depth of the collaboration that existed between the AG's office and Freeh's investigators.

At that evidentiary hearing, Sandusky's lawyers wrote, they would seek to depose Freeh, McChesney, and other Freeh investigators that include Gregory Paw and Omar McNeil. Sandusky's lawyers also seek to interview former deputy attorney generals Frank Fina, Jonelle Eshbach and Joseph McGettigan, as well as former AG agents Anthony Sassano and Randy Feathers.

According to the motion, the communications on the part of the AG's office "appear to have included information, and even testimony, from the special investigating grand jury then in session, which communications would be in direct violation of grand jury secrecy rules, and would subject the participants in the Attorney General's office to sanctions."

Sandusky's lawyers are also seeking disclosure of all of the so-called source materials for the Freeh Report. Those records, as previously mentioned, are still under seal in the ongoing cover-up of the scandal behind the Penn State scandal, as led by the stonewalling majority on the Penn State board of trustees.

Sandusky, 75, was re-sentenced on appeal last November to serve 30 to 60 years in prison for sexually abusing ten boys, the same sentence he originally got after he was convicted in 2012 on 45 counts of sex abuse.

According to a Dec. 2, 2011, letter of engagement, Freeh was formally hired by Penn State to "perform an independent, full and complete investigation of the recently publicized allegation of sexual abuse."

But instead of an independent investigation, the confidential documents show that the AG's office was hopelessly intertwined with the AG's criminal investigation, tainting both probes. According to the confidential documents, the AG's office was supplying secret grand jury transcripts and information to Freeh's investigators, along with trading information on common witnesses and collaborating on strategy.

The records also show that former deputy Attorney General Fina was in effect directing the Freeh Group's investigation by telling Freeh's investigators which witnesses they could interview, and when. In return, Freeh's investigators shared what they were learning during their investigation with Fina. And when they were done, Freeh's investigators showed the deputy AG their report before it was made public.



EOG Dedicated
The " fact Freeh " report love it

Anthony Lubrano, an outspoken renegade member of the Penn State board of trustees, opened up about the inner workings of that board, still in full cover-up mode.

Lubrano, who left the board in 2018 when his term was up, but was reelected, and returns to be sworn in today, also spoke candidly about the lack of due process at every stage of the so-called Penn State sex abuse scandal.

Lubrano did his talking on the latest episode of Search Warrant, a podcast hosted by three former cops, and joined by your humble Big Trial correspondent. Lubrano also opened up about his proposed resolution to have the university go to court and sue former FBI Director Louis Freeh, to reclaim the $8.3 million the university paid for Freeh's "fact-free report," as Lubrano put it.

The entire two-hour podcast can be heard here.


EOG master
Three years and this scumbag is still posting bullshit stories about his child rapist hero, LMAO. Fact, your child rapist hero will die in prison, get over it already, hopefully he's getting treated the same way he treated those young boys, you're obviously a sick motherfucker who probably fucks little boys as well, you should be reported to the proper authorities


EOG Dedicated
A public reprimand , that's it . Lives get destroyed and she gets a tongue lashing unreal

Lawyers' board castigates former state Supreme Court justice for work on Jerry Sandusky case

For errors in Jerry Sandusky case, former Penn State attorney gets scolding from lawyers’ board

JUL 22, 2020 AT 3:45 PM

FILE - Former Penn State attorney Cynthia Baldwin (Carolyn Kaster/AP)

Attorney Cynthia Baldwin was formally reprimanded for her handling of the Jerry Sandusky scandal at Penn State.

Pennsylvania’s disciplinary board for lawyers formally castigated a former state Supreme Court justice Wednesday, saying her legal work in the Penn State child sex-abuse scandal was marked by “incompetence” that violated the rights of top university administrators.

“You failed in your responsibilities,” Baldwin was told by James C. Haggerty, chairperson of The Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. “You failed to recognize the magnitude of the challenge.”

For Baldwin, the reprimand was a bitter end to an ordeal that began almost a decade ago when the investigation into sex abuser Sandusky and Penn State’s response to his wrongdoing dominated national news.

The board, an arm of the state Supreme Court, officially delivered a reprimand that had been ordered by the high court in February. The session was conducted on YouTube because of the coronavirus pandemic. Baldwin, 75, her frowning face visible within one box in the live stream, was silent throughout the six-minute denunciation.

The court found that the former justice violated four provisions of the state ethics code for lawyers. Among them was improperly revealing the confidences of former Penn State President Graham B. Spanier and two other former top administrators, which Haggerty said led to criminal charges against them.

Sandusky, a longtime assistant to Penn State football coach Joe Paterno, is serving at least 30 years in prison for molesting 10 boys. Prosecutors later said top administrators quickly decided not to alert authorities about a key allegation against Sandusky and later misled investigators and hid evidence about their actions.

Before becoming a justice, Baldwin, a Democrat, spent 16 years as a Common Pleas judge in Allegheny County. She was the first Black woman to win election to the county bench. Then-Gov. Ed Rendell appointed her to the high court in 2006. She served out the final two years of a departing justice’s term, stepped down, and in 2010 became general counsel for Penn State University. She was also on Penn State’s board.

At crucial sessions before an investigative grand jury in 2011, she sought to represent both Penn State as an institution, and the three top administrators who were under investigation for a suspected cover-up: Spanier, Vice President Gary Schultz and Athletic Director Tim Curley. All three would later be arrested in the scandal.

Two Common Pleas judges found no fault with Baldwin's multiple roles. But in a scathing 2016 opinion, the state Superior Court tossed out the most serious charges against the three men because of her conduct.

The appeals court said Baldwin and a top state prosecutor in the case, Frank Fina, had both violated the men's rights. It said Fina had wrongly called Baldwin herself as a witness against the men in a later grand jury proceeding.

The counsel to the lawyers’ disciplinary board then filed complaints against Baldwin and Fina. Review panels later rejected both complaints.

In Baldwin's case, her review panel issued a 43-page opinion in 2018 concluding that she had fully briefed the three men on her various legal roles. Moreover, the panel said, the men lied to her about their lenient response to Sandusky, falsely leading her to think no conflict existed between them and Penn State. The panel said she had a right to testify before prosecutor Fina about their lies in part to make it plain she had not joined in their cover-up.

Though the panels effectively cleared Baldwin and Fina, the full Disciplinary Board rejected that view and urged the state Supreme Court to discipline them. The high court did so, imposing its harsher punishment on Fina. His law license was suspended for a year and a day, while Baldwin faced only the verbal reprimand.

In his remarks Wednesday, Haggerty painted Baldwin as in over her head in a complex criminal case and oblivious that the probe had moved beyond Sandusky to the three administrators.

"Despite the enormity of the situation," said Haggerty, a Philadelphia personal-injury lawyer, "you failed to prepare yourself or your clients for the grand jury testimony in even the most basic manner."

Haggerty said Baldwin, because of her missteps, fatally undermined the cases against the three administrators.

After the Superior Court threw out the most serious felony perjury and obstruction charges against the trio, Curley and Schultz pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges of child endangerment. They each served less than three months behind bars.

Spanier went to trial and was found guilty of the same misdemeanor. That verdict was overturned last year by a federal judge who ruled that Spanier had been convicted under a statute not in effect when he was at Penn State.

A Superior Court ruled that the actions of Cynthia Baldwin, the university's then-general counsel, were improper in testifying against Gary Schultz, Graham Spanier and Tim Curley during grand jury proceedings. (Contributed Photo / AP)

(c)2020 The Philadelphia Inquirer


EOG Dedicated
This episode is fantastic . You have to just marvel at the work, and attention to detail John has put in to uncover the truth , based on facts he has uncovered .

I followed the case pretty close, but there are so many things John goes over that even I forgot

Episode Two: Panic
With the Benefit of Hindsight...

There is no more hated villain in society than the pedophile. When Pennsylvania Attorney General, Linda Kelly announced the existence of a serial pedophile in State College tension mounted but when Joe Paterno's name got thrown into the mix a full fledged moral panic ensued. In Episode Two: Panic, Liz and Zig take us back to November 2011 and unpack the disturbing events.
Listen on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podca...sodeGuid=de6127ddf2ca056b18e6fc4f22a56497.mp3


EOG Dedicated
It will be interesting to see if this podcast gets any national attention. Im sure the Blaze will give it exposure, and top 100 is something I guess

Dell Dude

EOG Master
I'll say this about John Ziegler. He is *unintentionally funny and entertaining. But they all look like 500 feet tape measures in the boxscore.


EOG Dedicated
The fact Freeh report ..... Anyone think it might have been a good idea to interview Mike Mcqueary? How about Joe, Curley, Schultz? How about some of the accusers? Nope ......
Rot in hell Louis

Episode Ten: Freeh As A Bird

With the Benefit of Hindsight...

Jerry Sandusky was convicted on June 22, 2012, just seven months after he was charged. In keeping with the torrid pace of this case, just three weeks later the results of an "independent" investigation conducted by former FBI Director Louis Freeh were publicly unveiled. The Freeh Report concluded that a "culture of corruption" existed within the athletic program and the university and that Penn State administrators, including the now deceased Joe Paterno, President Spanier, Gary Schultz and Tim Curley, covered up the child abuse crimes of Jerry Sandusky in order to protect the reputation of Penn State. The report was damning and a mortal blow to the ongoing efforts at resuscitating the reputations of Penn State leadership, but... John Ziegler wasn't buying any of it! Listen as Zig walks us through the master class in media manipulation put on by Louis Freeh, the now laughable findings of The Freeh Report and how he and Penn State legend, Franco Harris took on the NCAA.Listen on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcas...=1000523817796


EOG Dedicated
Episode Sixteen: Vindication
With the Benefit of Hindsight...

Zig and Liz summarize the story and the evidence presented in this series. Zig updates us with the latest developments in the case and Liz has some fun hitting John with a bunch of questions about his 10 year odyssey chasing the truth.Listen on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcas...=1000527036926


EOG Dedicated
EJ Sandusky was the first of six children adopted by Dottie and Gerry Sandusky. EJ and his family were certain that his father could not have committed the crimes of which he was accused but they didn't understand they were no longer living in a world of truth and facts. When Jerry was found guilty EJ was forced to relocate and seek a different career path. Ten years later EJ and his wife Heather are inspired to share their story with Zig.
Listen on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/with-the-benefit-of-hindsight/id1562078872?i=1000540507203


EOG Dedicated

I'll leave the last words to the man who's been in prison for the past ten years as a result of egregious official misconduct and a decade of media malpractice.

"I am an innocent person, wrongly convicted by sinister ways of deception, dishonesty and disregard," Sandusky wrote from prison.

"I did not commit the heinous crimes I was accused of doing. Oral and anal sex never entered my mind, nor did I ever engage in them with anybody. This includes my wife, who has been my only sexual partner and loyally stands with me today."

"I didn't hurt those kids, nor did they act like I did," Sandusky wrote. "My focus was on helping them."


EOG Dedicated

John Ziegler

10 years ago today, Joe Paterno died a broken man. “With the benefit of hindsight” he was the first victim of this era of “cancel culture,” as the news media turned a story that they didn’t have a clue about, and which had almost nothing to do with him, into a dramatic “Greek Tragedy,” all for ratings.
Here is my documentary film explaining…

Sickening watching this again , the complete ignorance and lack of facts by the media as the story evolved is pathetic and dangerous
Put the Statue back up !



Former NCIS special agent who investigated the Penn State scandal on behalf of the US Govt .

Never heard of him, and never heard anything about the results of the investigation?

Would it not make sense to know either way, since he returned Graham Spanier's national security clearance?

Why would he do that if Spanier was part of a "cover up"

How come he cant buy an interview with any major media ?

In the News | John Snedden | State College | Pittsford | jrsnedden.com

Joe Paterno did nothing wrong, because nothing happened

Dell Dude

EOG Master
JoPa should have fought back. Maybe it wouldn't have made a difference but least he would have gotten his pound of fake news flesh. Bending the knee is never plus EV unless you are performing oral sex.


EOG Dedicated
Star witness Mike McQueary pocketed more than Twelve Million Dollars for his testimony. He was one of many who profited greatly. I'm not convinced .


EOG Dedicated
Correct Then got divorced and disappeared He should have been in line for some coaching job, but he took the money and ran

If he saw something that horrific, why would you leave the kid there ? If you saw horsing around, why would you change your story years later?

Between sending dick pics on his phone to other women, one being Jerrys lawyers ex-wife , while being married, big gambling problem and probably fixing the Rutgers game ,
changing his story over and over,

not a very credible person to say the least



EOG Dedicated
I hope your kidding
Did you see Joe’s face after the Td?
No chance

Poor Mike mcq. Was so traumatized by what he saw
he waited two months to tell Joe
MM= Fraud


EOG Dedicated
I hope your kidding
Did you see Joe’s face after the Td?
No chance

Poor Mike mcq. Was so traumatized by what he saw
he waited two months to tell Joe
MM= Fraud
Penn State -20 gets the late cover- Did known gambler McQueary have a vested interest ?


EOG Dedicated

At Jerry Sandusky's Request, John Ziegler Summarizes Why He Became Convinced of the Alleged Child Abuser's Innocence​

Submitted by jzadmin on Mon, 03/28/2022 - 10:32

In preparation for him finally shifting his appeal efforts from state to federal court, Jerry Sandusky asked John Ziegler to write a short summary for him of how and why John became convinced of his innocence (though the federal appeals process will have very little to do with the actual facts of the case against him)..
Here is what Ziegler sent him...

Like almost the entire rest of the known world, in November 2011 I assumed that Jerry Sandusky must be at least guilty of most, if not all, of the crimes of sexual abuse with which he was being charged. There just did not seem to be a rational explanation for how so many false allegations could be levied against a man with such a previously great reputation.
However, when I began to dig deeper into the case as a documentary filmmaker interested in whether Joe Paterno and Penn State could have possibly helped Sandusky cover up his crimes (a scenario which was always totally nonsensical, especially given the timeline), it became clear that the path to Sandusky’s total innocence was neither all that long, nor very complicated. In fact, it was shockingly straight-forward and not involving any sort of real conspiracy theory (if anything, the news media’s conventional wisdom of the case was the one which required the massive conspiracy).
The first revelation which made me start to question whether Sandusky may be innocent was that, at the time of his arrest, after a three year investigation by the Attorney General’s office, there were only two men (not boys) who were alleging clear-cut sex acts, while all the others were claiming acts of “grooming” which could have theoretically been exaggerated or misunderstood. Therefore, the case really came down to those two allegations of sex acts (“Victim 1” and “Victim 4”) and the lone witness in the case, Mike McQueary.
Obviously, if any of those three men were telling the full truth, then Sandusky was a pedophile and presumed to be guilty of any similar allegations. However, if those three were NOT telling the truth, then the entire case against him would collapse like a house of cards.
McQueary was always the most important element of the case against Sandusky because he seemed to have the least to gain and the most to lose by making a false allegation. The accusers were clearly going to be paid a lot of money by Penn State if Sandusky was convicted, but there would have been no such expectation by McQueary when he first told his story of “seeing” (actually more like hearing) Sandusky in a shower with a boy.
While McQueary’s narrative never made any sense (mostly because of his total lack of effort to get the boy out of harm’s way), the first time that I began to get the very strong sense that his story was false was several months after Sandusky’s arrest, and not long before his super-rushed trial, when the prosecution was forced to admit that the date of the “McQueary Episode” was VERY wrong. They had claimed in the grand jury presentment that this incident had occurred on March 1, 2002, but were forced to change that date to February 9, 2001 because emails came to light proving that the date of the McQueary/Paterno meeting was February 10, 2001.
This was the single most underrated fact at Sandusky’s trial and it was absolute legal malpractice that the defense made such a minor issue of it. This dramatic thirteen-month change in the date of the most critical episode of the entire case (one of the very few with an actual date) should have, on its own, raised plenty of reasonable doubt about McQueary’s credibility. After all, how is it remotely possible that McQueary could misremember, under oath and after extensive research, the date, the month, and even the year in which this presumably HIGHLY memorable event allegedly occurred?!
However, it would take far too many years before I would discover that even that second date is so catastrophically wrong that it on its own proves that McQueary did NOT witness a sexual assault involving Jerry Sandusky and a “ten-year old boy.” After putting together all of the voluminous evidence, it is now clear that the actual date of the McQueary episode was December 29, 2000, meaning that he waited six weeks before reporting something related to the incident to Joe Paterno on February 10, 2001.
This destroys McQueary’s credibility on multiple levels. First, he got the date VERY wrong twice and in a way that is far more consistent with a blatant lie than a bizarre memory issue which, on its own, should have made people greatly suspect that his account was not reliable, especially all of these many years later.
Secondly, the entire reason that the prosecution presumed that the incident occurred on February 9th, 2001 is that they desperately needed it to be the night before he went to go see Joe Paterno, so that it was clear that he had great urgency to his report. However, there is absolutely no way to spin “great urgency” from waiting six weeks to report to your boss (not the police) on the day after the wide receiver’s coaching job you greatly wanted just happened to open up on Paterno’s staff.
Combining all of this with the knowledge (which I publicly broke) of the identity of the boy in the shower that night—Allan Myers, who was actually 13-years old and whose actions/words are totally inconsistent with ever having been a Sandusky victim—makes it absolutely impossible for McQueary’s story to be remotely true. NFL legend Franco Harris has told me, unequivocally, that McQueary made it clear to him at Paterno’s funeral that he did NOT witness a sexual assault.
With one pillar of the case now in ruins, that left only one other holding the entire thing together: the stories of “Victim 1” Aaron Fisher and “Victim 4” Brett Houtz. Neither holds up under even the slightest scrutiny.
After over a dozen friends, neighbors, and relatives, including his now ex-wife, of Fisher contacted me to say on the record why they have grave doubts about his claim of abuse, I was pretty certain he was not telling the truth. But what probably was the clincher for me was learning that his former stepdad, Eric Daniels, who had been Aaron’s male authority figure before Sandusky came into his life, had pleaded guilty to 100 counts of child sexual abuse, including of his own children.
While Aaron was not part of that case, his ex-wife make it clear to me that she knew that Arron had been sexually abused by Daniels (it should be noted that Aaron's own ever-changing timeline for having been abused is often far more consistent with the time Daniels was in his life than it with the Sandusky era). This then created the perfect path for Aaron to be somewhat convincing in his allegation, and for investigators to believe he had been sexually abused, but for Sandusky to have nothing to do with it.
I am relatively certain that Fisher (as well as his manipulative mother) knows that he was not sexually abused by Sandusky, but I am positive that, regardless of what he currently believes, he was not.
This leaves just Brett Houtz, who just happened to have the very same highly-suspect therapist as Fisher, Mike Gillum. Houtz’s story of being abused in hotel rooms during multiple bowl trips is inherently absurd, especially with Dottie Sandusky as a witness who directly contradicts his claim, but how he came to tell investigators of his abuse is even more suspicious.
With a plaintiffs lawyer (who would make many millions of dollars from the Sandusky case) mysteriously by his side during his police interview, Houtz at first is extremely hesitant to make a claim of direct sexual abuse. But then, in an exchange accidently recorded by mistake, the investigators and his lawyer effectively conspired to lie to Houtz about the nature of the evidence against Sandusky, thus making Houtz feel comfortable that HE would not be the one who put Sandusky behind bars (prosecutors would refer to him, after the trial, in a telling slap at Aaron Fisher, as their star witness) and it was only then that he finally spun a tale of direct/clear-cut sexual abuse.
Upon closer inspection there are all sorts of problems with Houtz’s allegations, just as there are with all of those against Sandusky. Where there should be lots of evidence, there is none. No pornography, no drugs, no alcohol, no payoffs, no physical evidence, no physical attacks in either direction, no plea bargain, no confession, along with a never-ending series of appeals despite a lack of monetary and political resources.
It is highly probable that there has never been another serial child sexual-abuser in modern history whose case fit all of those descriptions. That is because Jerry Sandusky is not an abuser of children, but a very obviously innocent man who was railroaded by a perfect storm of remarkable circumstances far beyond his control, or even understanding.