LOL
Somebody told Freeh what to say. Freeh does not say anything that he has not been told to say. You should know by now that is his business model.
BREAKING: Court orders Freeh documents be released to alumni-elected trustees
- Thread starter ChiTownLion
- Start date
LOL
Somebody told Freeh what to say. Freeh does not say anything that he has not been told to say. You should know by now that is his business model.
Not to be a debbie downer but how are we going to know if what is given is actually what materials they have? I am certainly not accusing the old guard BOT and Freeh of being lying scumbags who would roll over their own mothers to prevent themselves from any harm, but Freeh managed to deflect all blame in Vermont thanks to his FBI buddies and Damby almost managed to deflect his arrest. Are the real trustees counting on their inside source from Freeh to double check? Is there a listing of who Freeh interviewed and time frames of the interviews? I would think that if there is 3 hours of interview from Miss Vickie that there should be 3 hours of interview reflected in the information given to the trustees. I am sorry if it sounds that I am casting any doubts on the old guard and Freeh. That absolutely is not my intent. 
Not to be a debbie downer but how are we going to know if what is given is actually what materials they have? I am certainly not accusing the old guard BOT and Freeh of being lying scumbags who would roll over their own mothers to prevent themselves from any harm, but Freeh managed to deflect all blame in Vermont thanks to his FBI buddies and Damby almost managed to deflect his arrest. Are the real trustees counting on their inside source from Freeh to double check? Is there a listing of who Freeh interviewed and time frames of the interviews? I would think that if there is 3 hours of interview from Miss Vickie that there should be 3 hours of interview reflected in the information given to the trustees. I am sorry if it sounds that I am casting any doubts on the old guard and Freeh. That absolutely is not my intent.
I know people who were interviewed. And the questions were ridiculous. It was nowhere near looking for what actually happened. It was all leading questions looking for a predetermined answers. Hopefully this exposes this whole sham, and Freeh has success in his next suicide attempt.
Not to be a debbie downer but how are we going to know if what is given is actually what materials they have? I am certainly not accusing the old guard BOT and Freeh of being lying scumbags who would roll over their own mothers to prevent themselves from any harm, but Freeh managed to deflect all blame in Vermont thanks to his FBI buddies and Damby almost managed to deflect his arrest. Are the real trustees counting on their inside source from Freeh to double check? Is there a listing of who Freeh interviewed and time frames of the interviews? I would think that if there is 3 hours of interview from Miss Vickie that there should be 3 hours of interview reflected in the information given to the trustees. I am sorry if it sounds that I am casting any doubts on the old guard and Freeh. That absolutely is not my intent.
Agreed. and Claudine didn't know the gun was loaded either.
It's been a long road just to get to this point, and the end of the road is not near. But this is great, great news.
I have no idea if the material from Freeh can be sanitized somehow, but I guess the Trustee appointees will have someone figure that out.
Happy early Thanksgiving.
I have no idea if the material from Freeh can be sanitized somehow, but I guess the Trustee appointees will have someone figure that out.
Happy early Thanksgiving.
Not to be a debbie downer but how are we going to know if what is given is actually what materials they have? I am certainly not accusing the old guard BOT and Freeh of being lying scumbags who would roll over their own mothers to prevent themselves from any harm, but Freeh managed to deflect all blame in Vermont thanks to his FBI buddies and Damby almost managed to deflect his arrest. Are the real trustees counting on their inside source from Freeh to double check? Is there a listing of who Freeh interviewed and time frames of the interviews? I would think that if there is 3 hours of interview from Miss Vickie that there should be 3 hours of interview reflected in the information given to the trustees. I am sorry if it sounds that I am casting any doubts on the old guard and Freeh. That absolutely is not my intent.
You just beat me to it. Who is the curator of all this documentation, and what is to stop the shredder trucks from rolling in. Can they subpoena Freeh for any of the material? Do the documents include actual handwritten notes from the interviews, or just a summary of what was submitted as the final product? It's nice this is a win, it is a step toward a clearer picture of what exactly went on, but what are the penalties for non-compliance or if it's discovered that stuff was hidden, deleted, ignored, etc. Just asking the question.
The section Chi posted that reads "all materials generated, prepared, gathered, etc." by Freeh is where the critical info will be found, particularly the "prepared" reference. Why? because of the way law firms work. Freeh did not write his report by himself. One or more of his associates would have written the initial draft or two. But those minions would not have been in on the directional discussions between Freeh and the BOT committee he worked with. At some point, Freeh took over and inserted the narrative that he was instructed to emphasize. There will be an obvious point where this work in progress takes an accusatory turn and abandons any factual basis. Freeh will have to explain why he inserted this narrative, because I guarantee you it did not exist in the early drafts. No associate would go out on a limb and write such unsubstantiated nonsense.
The way I read it, they get to see everything, they just can't share it publically, which is what they wanted all along.
The docs are held by a law firm. They know better because they know they could be held responsible for destroying evidence.
They can't share specifics, but they can say the whole report is horseshit and they've seen the evidence. And call out The Medalist for his role. And possibly sue the medalist based on the info in the report. No wonder The Medalist only hangs out in certain circles now. He knows his role. His circle of friends shrunk to a paltry few after his role in all this. He knows what he is.
Well, if it gets released once, to the alumni elected trustees, then I would imagine it can be used as evidence again, without many hurdles, in another court case that may not have that stipulation.....a court case where the Freeh report, from which these notes and material was generated, is a central point between a family and a large organization that was charged with overseeing intercollegiate athletics....
Just maybe.
No, it does not, especially once one of the myriad of existing lawsuits introduces it as evidence.
And that she went on vacation with her defense attorney shortly after the trial and later married him. He was my hero in high school. I was on the ski team in high school and raced at Ski Roundtop.
He added, "It's people like Lubrano who are ruining this great university."
Big whoop! Lubrano and Lord are going to say that anyway!
If I were a "Paterno Loyalist", I'd much prefer to have someone with a history of being non-biased and logical and objective on this committee. If people like THAT came back and said "the Freeh Report is horse**it", then others may be more liable to listen.
But the "Paterno Loyalists" instead have hitched their wagon to a couple of extremely biased BoT members who have never shown any objectivity over the last 4 years.
Such is.
And look who you've hitched your wagon to the last four years.
MichNitt - just stuff it. Knock off the "Paterno Loyalist" insults. I am SO TIRED of that sort of crap. Both Lord and Lubrano, and others have stayed on task. It's what we've asked of them and I for one, am happy that they have had the fortitude to see this thru. Clearly Judge Howsare has seen thru the Board shenanigans - we should take comfort in the fact that a PA Judge is looking out for our best interests.
Your post wreaks of nervousness. If you think all they can do is look and write a report, you're sadly mistaken.
JACKPOT!
Administration releases statement regarding court decision on Freeh materials
November 19, 2015
UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. -- Penn State's administration has issued a statement following a decision by the Court of Common Pleas of Centre County with regard to a lawsuit filed by seven alumni-elected trustees. The suit sought certain materials generated as a result of the Freeh investigation. Leadership has consistently pledged that the University would work to protect individual anonymity of the people interviewed. The judge's decision grants the trustees' request to review the Freeh documents, subject to a confidentiality order and the threat of sanctions for noncompliance. The administration is pleased with the outcome.
DOWNLOAD: Click here to read the judge's opinion.
Statement:
"We are pleased with the court’s recognition of the university’s interest in maintaining the confidentiality of the materials, particularly the names and identities of those who were interviewed for the Freeh Report. The seven alumni elected trustees’ continuing demand to know 'who said what?' is contrary to the university's efforts to create a climate where people feel safe in reporting possible wrongdoing. The university offered repeatedly to provide essentially all of the approximately 3.5 million documents collected by the Freeh firm with no redactions whatsoever and all of the Freeh firm’s work product and interview memoranda with redactions of personally identifiable information, all under the conditions of a confidentiality agreement. This legal action was an unnecessary and wasteful expense."
"While we would have hoped that a confidentiality agreement would have been sufficient to protect the university’s interests, the court’s order provides additional protection from any breach of the court’s confidentiality requirements."
c'mon man, are you really expecting anything earth shattering? The dickwads probably already shredded, removed, lost, spilled coffee on the original documents and doctored anything left. Too many wealthy people in this tiny town running things and covering things up to save their arse. I hope I am wrong but I ain'ts gettin' me hopes up.
The alumni trustees offer to keep certain things confidential does not preclude them from acting on the information.
Sarah Palin has a phrase for this......"YOU BETCHA"!
Oh, I'm sure Lubrano and Lord will do a lot of stuff.
As for me, here is the standard in terms of meaningful "stuff" that they may do. They must either find (1) or (2) below:
(1) Tangible evidence that any BoT members told Freeh what to conclude beforehand.
(2) Tangible proof that any of the facts that Freeh laid out in the Freeh Report are fabricated.
It's put up or shut up time for Lubrano and Lord. Find either (1) or (2) or shut up. No more excuses from those two.
Oh don't worry. He won't be standing anywhere near the fan. He's been offered and accepted 'asylum' on the Michigan board. Surprised he's even here to comment.
http://michigan.forums.rivals.com/t...he-offer-im-accepting-aslyum-over-here.86675/
Overbroad generalization. People want the whole story. That doesn't make anybody a loyalist to anyone. I used to be a PSU loyalist. Then they gave me reason to doubt a lot of things. If the Freeh disclosures show all this evil and moral turpitude on the part of the accused, then good. Then at least I know 4 years ago they acted in good faith. So far I don't believe any such thing.
So, just so I am clear; there will be (hopefully) an unsanitized version of all the material that went into the Freeh report that will be made available to a group of people, who have only asked that everything be laid on the table for them for inspection.
And somehow, you equate THAT to "extremely biased opinion?" And only that?
Shocking.
The only thing that really matters is whether the docs actually support the report and its conclusions. We already know the report doesn't support the conclusions, so its safe to say the support docs don't even with "massaging." Not only that, the trustees can still verify with the witnesses.
Oh don't worry. He won't be standing anywhere near the fan. He's been offered and accepted 'asylum' on the Michigan board. Surprised he's even here to comment.
http://michigan.forums.rivals.com/t...he-offer-im-accepting-aslyum-over-here.86675/
Yeah, that's a good thread --- let's discuss some of my posts in that thread.
What do you think about Anthony Lubrano's behavior on this board back in June 2012? Most specifically: (1) Outing MarshCreekEagle, and (2) leaking details from the Freeh Report prior to its release.
And a related question: why doesn't anyone here demand that Lubrano --- a frequent poster on this board, after all ---- tell us WHO leaked those details to him?
Mich-you got issues man. Just by invoking Paternos name it shows how far out of touch you are with the real issues.
You seem really nervous trying to diminish this.
Leaks can happen, just liked in grand jurys in PAThe alumni trustees offer to keep certain things confidential does not preclude them from acting on the information.
I was here, Marsh outed himself, even after having had a very public football newsletter. It was quite comical, I literally had no idea who Lubrano was talking to until Marsh went off the rails.
Similar threads
