Email Proof Ray Blehar is Lying About What He Believes Regarding Victim 2 & Jerry Sandusky

I have made a lot of mistakes in this crusade for the truth of this case, but one of my biggest was trusting Ray Blehar. I brought him into "Framing Paterno," introduced him to Franco Harris, and put him in the original version of my film, "The Framing of Joe Paterno." I did these things even though I quickly suspected that Ray was at least partly insane. I did this largely because he is a pretty good encyclopedia of the details of this case and because there were so few people who seemed willing to take a serious look at the other side of this story.

Slowly though, it became clear to me that Ray was not only nonsensical in his larger, always uncompleted, theories of the case, but that he was wrong about nearly every major prediction/assertion he has made in this story.

Among the examples of this reality are the following:

Ray bet me $2,000 just after the Freeh Report that he would prove that Freeh faked emails. He never did that, and he did not pay me.

Ray claimed that Sandusky was always referred to as coach and Paterno as Joe, a claim needlessly and completely discredited by Sandusky to the point that I had to take this out of the second version of "The Framing of Joe Paterno."

Ray claimed constantly that Rodney Erickson would be arrested, and yet all that has happened was that he has had things at PSU named after him.

Ray constantly claims that PSU "reported" the 2001 incident despite the fact that the administrators defense team has never made that claim in court, Sandusky was not informed of that as would have been required, and if that did happen it would back up Mike McQueary, who Ray has roundly mocked.

Ray claimed to have proven that the janitor who allegedly witnessed the "Victim 8" episode was not working at PSU at the time. When I proved to him that he was indeed working part-time, Ray was forced to admit that his only significant contribution to the factual record was false.

Ray constantly claimed that Kathleen Kane's investigation was going to break open the political conspiracy he has been promising in this case (something I told him from day one was never going to happen), but her report was a complete dud on that front.

Ray has also lied to me personally on at least two occasions. The first was when he said he would give out the remainder of the "Hey Media" T-Shirts at the "Rally for Resignations" but ended up effectively selling them for his own expenses (something I wouldn't have had a huge issue with if he had told me that was what he was going to do). The second was when he and Eileen Morgan agreed, in writing, to stop posting at PS4RS in protest of their censoring posts objecting to the PSU BOT (including the "Reform" members) voting for the absurd Sandusky settlements, only to immediately break that pledge without even telling me.

For a number of reasons, I have largely remained silent about all of this, but I can no longer. Now Ray is blatantly lying about Dottie Sandusky and about what he believes regarding the identity of "Victim 2," which is the key to the entire case. Even worse, it is very clear to me and to others that he is doing this primarily because of his intense jealousy of me.

You see, I actually came to believe in Sandusky's innocence largely because of the work of Ray. I think Ray knows there is a very good chance that Sandusky is innocent, but he lacked the courage to say that publicly and his desire to kiss Paterno backside was way too great for him to overcome. Now that I have taken on that cause and we have publicly separated from each other (after Ray was proven wrong on the janitor), he desperately needs me to be perceived as being wrong. It is personal for Ray and has nothing to do with the truth of this matter.

In his latest postings (which have numerous blatant factual errors and distortions), Ray claims that Dottie (to whom he has never spoken and who thinks he is a joke) is delusional/lying when she says that she thinks Jerry is innocent. Ray also claims that Allan Myers, whom I revealed this week to be "Victim 2," is probably not the McQueary victim.

Part of me is thrilled that Ray has made this absurd assertion because, given his dismal track record regarding predictions in this case, I am now even MORE confident that I am right about this subject. But the part that has me agitated, and which forced me to write this post, is that I KNOW Ray is lying about his belief regarding Allan Myers being "Victim 2."

Not only have I already proven that concluding that Allan Myers is not 'Victim 2" requires a completely bizarre alternative explanation for the factual record (which, as usual, Ray doesn't even try to offer) in this video, but I also have numerous email exchanges with Ray proving that he himself has NO doubt that Myers is indeed the guy from the McQueary episode.

I am posting four of these email exchanges here. I am sure Ray's conspiracy "nutty buddies" will try to claim that I have faked/altered these emails, but I will gladly bet ANY amount of money that they are not.

The first exchange (which, like all of them, is read in reverse chronological order) starts just before my first Today Show appearance and after we had spoken on the phone numerous times about me figuring out that Allan Myers was "Victim 2."

Notice that Ray is not only 100% on board, but very early on the morning of the program Ray actually sent a photo of Allan speaking at a major Second Mile event within a year of the McQueary episode. It should also be pointed out that his emails regarding Myers were described, by HIM, in the subject lines: "Quote/speech from V2" and "I found a picture of him (V2)."

-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Blehar <[email protected]>
To: talktozig <[email protected]>
Sent: Mon, Mar 25, 2013 4:24 am
Subject: Quote/speech from V2

Then, a few months later, Ray not only makes it VERY VERY clear that Allan Myers is "Victim 2" (and that he shares my view of how Allan became a "victim"), but he also, very importantly, says that he is "95% certain" that Sandusky never engaged in sexual activity! He also makes yet another totally false assertion when he claims that he has proof of Second Mile "payoffs" to keep victims quiet. There has never been a shred of evidence of this even though "victims" would have had a HUGE incentive to reveal this because it would prove they are victims.

-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Blehar <[email protected]>
To: talktozig <[email protected]>
Sent: Mon, Jul 8, 2013 4:08 pm
Subject: Re: I wouldn't push this point any longer....

Then, later that month, Ray once again emails me regarding Allan Myers being "Victim 2" while also showing some significant ignorance regarding the facts of the Myers story/timeline (for the record, Myers also had a DUI, represented by attorney Andrew Shubin, before the story broke and he became a "victim").

-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Blehar <[email protected]>
To: talktozig <[email protected]>
Sent: Fri, Jul 19, 2013 8:43 pm
Subject: Re: Some more thoughts on the Sandusky interview

Finally, last fall Ray responded to me sending him an email exchange between me and Jim Clemente. This was regarding what happened when Jim likely lied to me about Allan Myers being in contact with a CSA friend of his and requesting that I not say his name on CNN. Once again, the issue of Allan Myers being "Victim 2" is, just as it should be based on the factual record, is not even remotely in question.

I fully realize that for conspiracy nut jobs the facts are never going to matter, but the record should be clear that Ray Blehar is a lying fraud.

As for those who will claim that maybe Ray changed his mind (just like I did about Sandusky's guilt), the reality is that the only thing we have learned for sure since then is that Allan Myers got $3 million from Penn State for being "Victim 2" and there are MANY other new indicators that he is in fact the kid and that he was never abused. There is not one shred of credible new information pointing towards the direction of Allan Myers not being "Victim 2" (or, for that matter, Sandusky ever having had sexual contact with a boy).

I guess the most bizarre part about Ray's public stance on Allan Myers is that he (just like Eileen Morgan) has gone to extraordinary lengths to discredit Mike McQueary's testimony, but he doesn't want to (publicly) accept that the story of Allan Myers, which backs up his view of McQueary 100%, is indeed from the right guy. I don't even know how anything Ray is doing/saying even theoretically helps refute the case against Penn State and Joe Paterno. If anything, Ray seems to be trying to further implicate them (though, admittedly, it is impossible to know for sure since Ray never tells a remotely full story).

Right there is the ultimate proof that this is not about the truth for Ray. This is about a vendetta against me. One that truth-seekers, regardless of their opinions of this case, should resoundingly reject.