Skip to comments.Penn State Taps Ex-FBI Director for Investigation Into Child Sex-Abuse Allegations
Posted on 11/21/2011 10:04:24 AM PST by ColdOne
Penn State University's board of trustees tapped former FBI director Louis Freeh Monday to help lead an investigation into the child sexual abuse scandal involving former defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky.
"The entire Board of Trustees is intent on taking all steps necessary to ensure that our institution never again has to ask whether it did the right thing, or whether or not it could have done more," said trustee Ken Frazier, chairman of the special committee.
"We are committed to leaving no stone unturned to get to the bottom of what happened, who knew what when, and what changes we must make to ensure this doesn't happen again. Therefore, we are pleased that Judge Freeh has agreed to lead a thorough and independent investigative review of this matter."
Frazier, the CEO of pharmaceutical giant Merck, promised a "comprehensive and independent investigation into exactly what happened," and said "no one is above scrutiny."
The committee will review how the university handled the situation and look into whether action should have been taken by university employees to potentially stop the alleged abuse from continuing
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Perhaps “tap” isn’t the best choice of words, here.
Spare me the nonsense about “doing the right thing” with this investigation. They have seen this coming for at least a year. And they only now hire an investigator? This is just a reaction to bad publicity.
Since Mr. Sandusky has been indicted by a grand jury, do we have to keep saying “alleged abuse” and “might have occurred”?
And it’s not clear to me what Mr. Freeh’s legal standing is. Is he a licensed private investigator? An employee of the University? An attorney retained by the Board of Trustees?
Does he legally have access to all university records and communications? Without subpoena authority, what is his basis for compelling disclosure of any information? What authority to his “recommendations,” if any, have on the University?
IMO, they ouight to shut down the football program for 3 years and start up anew. Thats the only way to stop these people.
Freeh is the dunce who falsely accused Richard Jewell - with the Olympic bombing.
He is a hack who will accuse whoever the trustees wish accused of something while shielding whoever they want shielded. That is his track record, and it is really the only reason anyone would hire him now.
Since Louis Freeh was incapable of seeing the corruption, incompetence and criminal negligence that brought down Wilmington Trust (he was on the board of directors), He makes a great fit.
Thank you - that was very informative. I couldn’t see how this would help in terms of gathering facts and promoting accountability. Apparently it’s not intended to help in that way.
Who will pay Louie’s price? Who has the most to gain from a favorable finding by Louie’s “investigation?”
Sure. The Trustees can see whatever they want and give their agent authority to see anything in University files as well as compel participation by University staff. S taff can of course clam up and lawyer up.
If the corruption here stopped at the staff level this all makes sense. If, on the other hand, the Trustees knew about this then the whole thing is a whitewash.
Inasmuch as an indictment handed down by a grand jury is in effect just an allegation, the short answer is "yes".
Good questions. I suspect the investigation will take some time. Probably more than Joe Pa has, given that he has cancer. There has already been a coverup and the person investigating things years ago disappeared never to be seen again. Stains on a reputation that Penn State will have to wear for many years to come.
He has no inherent power. It's that simple. His recommendations are not binding. He can request information and the University may order it to be produced. He has no legal mechanism to compel truthful testimony, to sanction witnesses, or to compel production.
Here's the disturbing thing. Did you realize that Penn State University is not subject to the Pennsylvania Open Records law?
When Penn State gave up its private status in the early 1970s it did not become a member of public Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education. Instead, it's a member of Pennsylvania's Commonwealth System of Higher Education, like Temple and University of Pittsburgh. Universities in the Commonwealth System of Higher Education are considered 'public' universities and receive public money, but they are under their own independent control rather than control of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Penn State controls Penn State; the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania does not. And the state open records laws do not apply to Penn State.
I continue to find the ex officio role of the Governor, Tom Corbett, on the Board of Trustees fascinating. Did you realize that in 2009, Corbett, as State Attorney General, began the Sandusky investigation? It was only after he was elected governor in 2010 that he ceased to be involved in the Sandusky investigation. And he sat on the Board of Trustees (unable to disclose things he knew through the grand jury and other investigative processes) with fellow Board members. No wonder the Penn State Trustees acted so quickly to fire Spanier and Paterno once Governor Corbett arrived for the Board's special meeting.
I wouldn't put much emphasis on that. As Centre County District of Attorney, Ray Gricar was involved in the 1998 investigation. That investigation only involved two boys: Victim #6 and another boy known to us only as 'B.K'
It's clear from the Grand Jury presentment that Sandusky slowly groomed boys. He went from touching their thighs, to showering, to manual molestation, and then to oral sodomy and sometimes anal sodomy.
The mother of Victim #6 noticed that her son came home with wet hair after an outing with Sandusky. She questioned her son, found out that Sandusky had showered with him and hugged him, and she called the University Police.
This was in May 1998. The University Police and the State College police eavesdropped on two phone calls between the mother of Victim #6 and Sandusky in which admitted to showering with the boy (and other boys), and hugging him. Sandusky said he didn't know if his private parts touched the boy but said he didn't think so.
The second boy, B.K., had experienced the same thing.
A grown man showering with an 'at-risk' boy he is supposed to be mentoring is wrong. It's simply wrong. So is hugging the boy. So is picking the boy up to wash his hair. But it's not molestation.
Gricar never prosecuted Sandusky. The investigation apparently only turned up B.K., who also had not been molested. The Grand Jury presentment makes it clear that Gricar was never given information on the 2000 oral sodomy or 2002 anal rape incidents involving Sandusky.
Gricar may simply have had no legal grounds to charge child molestation.
Gricar didn't go missing until 2005, shortly after he announced the largest drug bust in Centre County history. His car was near a river; his brother had committed suicide by jumping in a river. His county laptop was found in the river, missing the hard drive. The hard drive was found in the river, too, but it had been physically damaged and damaged by water. No data was retrieved from it.
Gricar's home computer showed internet searches on "ways to destroy a hard drive" and "ways to destroy a hard drive with water."
Gricar's nephew said that Gricar had a 'bad taste in his mouth' about Penn State football and Joe Paterno. Apparently, Gricar felt that he had been stonewalled on the Sandusky investigation. At least, that's my conclusion.
However, I think at this point it's a stretch to tie Gricar's disappearance in 2005 to a 1998-99 investigation of Sandusky.
Wasn’t it during the tenure of Louis Freeh as FBI Director that Hillary and Bill Clinton obtained the 800+ confidential, raw files on their political opponents?
Oh, great—Louis Freeh...the man who sent FBI snipers in to kill a mother and her son at Ruby Ridge.
Yeah, this guy will do a great whitewash(er...I mean...investigation).
Mark Fuhrman would do a good job.
Mark Fuhrman would do a good job.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.