This clearly includes colluding with the AG's office and the NCAA. Freeh hid it in plain sight. So his statements about independence and secrecy are a complete joke. He made those groups part of the SIC on purpose. The leaks could have come from any of them.
A Grand Jury is the prosecutions tool used to gain indictments. The attorneys question witnesses with a sole purpose - to enter into the record incriminating evidence ONLY. They ask no questions that might have exculpatory answers. There is no cross-examination. There is no defense attorney present to ask questions. The entire process is totally one-sided and prejudicial by design - all prosecution and NO defense.
Freeh was supposed to be conducting a full investigation to get at the truth. His report was not presumed to rubber stamp an indictment procedure. This is extremely important and should immediately make anyone who accepted the Freeh Report as a serious fair and balanced inquiry to seek truth to re-evaluate their opinion.
McQueary Asked to be Interviewed by Freeh
We know Mike McQueary spoke to Joe for 10 minutes. Four of the words he used in that 10 minute talk were reportedly "a sexual nature" and "fondling" 4 words out of how many he spoke that day a decade in the past and in what context?
There is now some evidence to the contrary. From Joe himself in his conversation with Gary Gray on Dec 6th. Our memories are interesting things - particularly the memory of an 85 year old a decade following a brief conversation. As it becomes more important and we have time to reflect on it things come back to us. So after being removed as head coach and the media frenzy did Joe recall more of the conversation?
Was it something like this during the 5 or 6 minutes Mike spoke to Joe?
"Joe I don't know exactly what was happening. I expected to see two adults having sex when I heard those sounds. I visualized seeing that prior to glancing for 1 or 2 seconds. I wasn't sure what I was seeing. Something of a sexual nature? Fondling or something like that? I just can't be certain my observation was so brief and I was so shocked when it wasn't two adults like I expected. I thought something of a sexual nature was happening in the showers from the sounds I heard prior to glancing inside but seeing an older man's backside at first glance and the boy on the second glance was not what I expected. So I can't be certain what I was seeing"
YDid Joe ask Mike what they talked about after he received his subpoena in Dec of 2010? I would have if I didn't recall what was said a decade prior to the serving. Mike and Joe were working together. Why wouldn't they discuss it?
The media and Kelly made the world think that this was such a huge deal to Joe Tim and Gary they could not possibly forget what was said in those brief encounters a decade in the past. But that is simply absurd if they came to believe that Mike's 1 or 2 second glances were of Jerry doing his bear hug routine with no sexual intent as was the conclusion of the DPW and CYS in 1998.
Read more articles on the Freeh Fiction
- Each Freeh Key Finding is a Misleading Deception
- The FREEH FICTION COVER UP - Animation
- The FREEH REPORT is a MYTH
- 2001 Freeh Framing - Strange Evidence & Fiction
- K. I. S. S. Keep it Simple - 1998 Did Joe Know Ver...
- Analysis: Coach is NOT believed to be Paterno
- 2004/5 PSU MessageBoard Chat Gives Investigators N...
- FRAMING PATERNO POLL RESULTS
- Freeh Lied About 1998 and Here's The Proof
- More ALTERED EMAIL? Blowing Up the Freeh Fiction
- Altered E-mail Found in Freeh Report Contains Dama...
- Eileen Morgan's Critical Analysis of Freeh