8/10/2019 Freeh Review Op Ed Final

1/2

A true Freeh report review must be unfettered and uncensored

Thomas Jefferson once said, Honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom. It is with the goal of

greater wisdom that the nine alumni-elected members of Penn State Universitys Board of Trustees havesought to determine the actual facts surrounding the Sandusky scandal and its impact on Penn State.

As events unfolded in 2011 and 2012, the PSU Board of Trustees engaged the services of former FBI

director Louis Freeh to conduct an independent investigation into the circumstances surrounding this

sad chapter in our schools history so that steps could be taken to prevent anything remotely similar

from ever happening again.

Alas, Freehs report left many in the Penn State community with far more questions than answers.

Accordingly, many have called for a careful look at the materials that underpin Mr. Freehs report to

determine, once and for all, if his investigation truly supports his findings or if instead, the report is

merely a hastily-prepared, incomplete, mass-market, media product. The report has been criticized by

numerous experts for its questionable accuracy and unsupported conclusions. Former U.S. Attorney

General and Pennsylvania Governor Dick Thornburgh concluded the Freeh Report was seriously

flawed.

In November, we were informed that the full set of background documents and materials would be

made available to trustees for review. However, on December 19, President Barron published an op-ed

in the Centre Daily Times, explaining his intention to protect the individual anonymity of those

interviewed by Freeh. To that end, President Barron has asked attorneys to redact or withhold

information that would reveal interviewee identity. It is understandable that Dr. Barron believes

individual confidentiality is important. We too are sensitive to the subject, but believe that getting to the

complete truth outweighs the importance of individual confidentiality. On the surface such

confidentiality appears well intentioned. Yet if interviewee identity is withheld, no one can accurately

assess the quality of the testimony and we can never know how Freeh weighed such testimony. Foranyone to conduct a credible, in-depth review of Mr. Freehs findings, unfettered and uncensored

access to all the materials Freeh used is necessary. The very reputation of our university is on the line.

Any action taken to redact or change information is an action that compromises transparency.

For example, the position or title held by an interviewee is highly relevant to give context to his or her

statements or opinions. Certain persons positions would preclude firsthand accounts, whereas others

are in a position to provide credible testimonybut without names and positions, whos to know?

Further, it is critical that we understand the nature and quality of the questioning of interviewees.

Several witnesses have said they were harassed and pressured to make statements contrary to their

own viewpoints. By definition, redaction will necessarily alter the context of the questioning and the

interviewees answers.

It has been suggested that Mr. Freeh interviewed as many as 430 persons in conducting his

investigation. However, very few individual interviews are actually contained in the report. What was

Freehs purpose in not including the information obtained from the vast majority of the interviews? We

8/10/2019 Freeh Review Op Ed Final

2/2

Believe there may be great value in seeing all of the materials, from all of the individuals Freeh

interviewed. Only then will we have a clear picture of what Mr. Freeh decided to include in the report,

and what he chose to leave out.

The Freeh Report is at the center of reputational damage, the NCAA sanctions, and endless public

criticism suffered by the Penn State community over the past several years. Our highest principles as

trustees compel us to search for complete understanding of the most destructive and tragic chapter in

the history of our University. Only then can we arrive at the truth and let the healing begin.

Albert L. Lord.

Anthony P. Lubrano

William F. Oldsey