Spanier's Attorneys Refutes Freeh Report

It's an 18 page report from Spanier's attorneys that says despite claims otherwise,  the Freeh Report can not be considered quote "...fair, objective, and comprehensive." One reason why, is because Jerry Sandusky, Gary Schultz, and Tim Curley weren't interviewed by the Freeh Group at the request of their lawyers, and the group didn't interview Joe Paterno before he died.

Tim Lewis, like Louis Freeh, was a United States District Judge. He says that, among other reasons, is why he's qualified to discredit the Freeh Report.

"I know the difference between a balanced, fair and judicious assessment of evidence on the one hand, and a flat out distortion of facts so infused with bias and innuendo, that it is quite simply unworthy..."

Spanier's attorney's pick three excerpts from the report to target. The Freeh Report says Spanier, Curley, Schultz and Paterno "...failed to protect against a child sexual predator harming children for over a decade...", "...concealed Sandusky's activities from the Board of Trustees, the university community and authorities...", And that they "...exhibited a striking lack of empathy for Sandusky's victims."

Spanier's attorneys also say that the chain of e-mails between the brain trust is incomplete, because many of the school's e-mails were erased due to a computer changeover in 2004. They were asked about an e-mail in February 2001, which Spanier wrote to Curley and Schultz, which talked about the only downside for the three not reporting it, would be if it came to light, they would be cited for ignoring it. Lewis wouldn't directly answer
the question.

"We're going to defer to Dr Spanier to explain what he meant and intended by that."

So why wasn't Spanier there himself?  John E, Riley, another attorney for Spanier says that time will come.

"They'll be a separate time and separate occasions for dr spanier to speak; this is not his burden to address the many flaws in the Freeh report"

The report also claims that the Freeh Group didn't attempt to interview Dr Jonathan Dranov, and completely ignored his testimony from the Sandusky Trial. He claims to have spoken to former Assistant Mike McQueary hours after he allegedly saw Sandusky with a boy in the shower. Dranov says that McQueary's report of what happened seemed more like horseplay, not a sexual encounter.