Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Insider(s) leave trail of evidence suggesting Freeh, PSU, and PA covering for DPWs failure
The clues left behind by the insiders included: the odd numbering scheme of Appendix A that was ordered 2, 3, 5, 6, and 10; footnotes referencing the exhibits were out of sequence, the turning the pages in Exhibit 2H and 2I on their sides; and including exhibits that served no useful purpose. All but the last could be attributed to sloppy work but you dont pay $6.5M for sloppiness. This is sabotage from within Freehs SIC.
the page. If you go to Exhibit 2C (farther down the page) of the Freeh Report, youll see a more correct, but not complete, flow of e-mail between Curley and Schultz regarding the updates. Conclusion A: Exhibit 2B is not raw data and has been altered. It is also a signal that other e-mail evidence may have been altered.
The more critical piece of evidence is at B, which states that DPW has decided to resolve this quickly. This e-mail was sent just days after the DPW brought in an unlicensed counselor, John Seasock, to conduct a psychiatric evaluation of the child (Victim 6) and three weeks before the DPW interviewed Sandusky. The conclusion that this e-mail is the work of an insider is drawn from the fact that the footnote referencing it as the source to the passage coach is anxious to know where it stands. Exhibit 2C, below, could have been used to source the information about coach is anxious because it provides a more correct, but not complete, chain of correspondence between Curley and Schultz. Conclusion B: Exhibit 2B serves the purpose of leaking damaging information about DPW (that Freeh attempted to conceal) and the undermines the veracity of the Freeh Report.
Part IV: Tom Harmons Concern about DPW and Second Mile
In 1998, Penn State Director of Public Safety, Tom Harmon had the role of relaying information from Detective Schreffler to Gary Schultz. What went up the flagpole to Schultz is likely not the full and complete accounting of the facts, but what Harmon thought Schultz needed to know about the investigation of Sandusky. One of the things Harmon relayed to Schultz was his concern about DPWs role in the investigation and a potential conflict of interest with Second Mile.
"Harmon continued to provide Schultz with information about DPW's role and their potential conflict of interest with the Second Mile."Harmon provided an update to Schultz on May 8, 1998 reporting that Lauro "indicated that it was his intent to have a psychologist who specializes in child abuse interview the children. This is expected to occur in the next week to week and a half. I don't anticipate anything to be done until that happens."
According to the Freeh Report (page) it was the local CYS that had the conflict of interest with Second Mile.
In reality, both CYS and DPW had conflict of interest issues with Second Mile. Both were receiving services that reduced the burden on state and local tax coffers. But the reason Lauro was assigned to the case was because DPW was responding to the Child Abuse Hotline Call from Dr. Alycia Chambers.
Hotlines and customer service lines all work the same. You call, get a number, and someone resolves the problem. Jerry Lauro was assigned to take care of the incident it was that simple. Freehs group twists and contorts the facts about Alycia Chambers report. On May 4th, 1998, Chambers interviewed the mother of Victim 6 and her child, who she had been seeing for some time before the incident. Chambers knew that Victim 6 was not a foster child. Freeh has made this up this foster child story out of whole cloth. Conclusion: Freehs assertion of why Lauro was assigned is FALSE, the referral story is FALSE, and Freeh fails to mention DPWs conflict of interest issue with Second Mile.
Its clear that the police report was altered by someone. And its clear that Freehs group didnt look at this report closely or ask any questions about its veracity. Document fraud is a crime and this requires an official investigation.
Conclusion: The alterations of the police report make it appear that DPW/Lauro had the lead role in the case and were advising the DAs office on how to proceed. The chronology of the changes do not flow logically, however, and demand further investigation.