My Last Email Exchange With Jim Clemente

Before and after my interview with Jerry Sandusky I had extremely extensive and intensive interaction with sex crimes expert Jim Clemente, who had previously written a highly-praised report for the Paterno family. Most of our communication was via email and on the phone, though we did meet once on the set of his TV show "Criminal Minds."
During this time, I put a great deal of trust in Jim as both a professional and as a person. I structured some of my interview with Sandusky based on his advice and gave him a lot of inside information knowing that it would likely then get to Scott Paterno, whom I already knew viewed me as an enemy to be destroyed. I also tried extremely hard to understand and implement his theories on how pedophiles work into my analysis of what really happened here.
For quite some time I have been suspecting that this trust in Jim was misplaced. I kept giving him the benefit of the doubt even after he proactively did great damage (at best, out of cowardice) to my efforts and it turned out that his handle on the facts of this case was rather weak. This is the way I generally judge people; they are "innocent" until proven "guilty."
I have remained largely silent about any of this until now because I recently I have concluded that Jim is, in fact, "guilty" of blowing this case in important ways, not being honest, and of putting his own self interest way ahead of the truth of this matter.
What follows is what is sure to be our final email exchange. It occurred because Jim, while engaged in some Q & A on Twitter. While he did his best to avoid answering legitimate questions from me about why some of the victims had clearly changed their stories for money. There he made come very "misleading" statements about how it was that he came to change his mind at the last minute (calling me just before I went on CNN) about "approving" of me giving the name of Victim 2, who had written published letters to the editor about his support for Sandusky in his own name.
I am publishing this email exchange (in the order in which it occurred) not because the relatively minor dispute is important beyond our own little worlds, but rather because I think it illustrates just how little Jim Clemente, a person who played an incredibly important role in the Paterno family response here, really cares at all about the truth in general, or the truth of this case in particular.
I do this fully understanding that some will think ill of me for taking this position, but I have long-since stopped caring what most people think of me in all of this. My only agenda is the truth of what really happened in this saga.
Here is that email exchange in the order in which it occured.:
On Sep 17, 2013, at 12:31 PM, John Ziegler <[email protected]> wrote:

Why are you blatantly lying about what happened with us and V2? You claimed to me to have contact with him and that he was upset. That was lie. Now you make it sound like you were never on board with saying the name to begin with or had some actual real information which changed your mind (coincidentally 15 minutes before I went on CNN). That is also a lie. Then you sat back and let me get crucified for "blackmailing" V2 when you knew damn right well i was trying very hard to accommodate him/you.
Are you really this much of a liar or just such a coward that you are somehow afraid of losing your place on the abuse victim gravy train?
You blew this case Jim. You had very little information when you wrote your report and you totally miscalculated (to be generous) how different the case was from normal because of the special circumstances. Most of the victims have blatantly changed/exaggerated their stories for money.
Unless you fix your lies (you won't) I promise you that you have just earned yourself the worst enemy you could ever imagine for the rest of this life and most of the next.
John Ziegler
[email protected]

From: Jim Clemente <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 18:31:21 -0700
To: John Ziegler<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Twitter

What are you talking about???

Chris Anderson told me he had direct contact with V2, that's what I told you. Then you talked to Chris and you told me you agreed to not release the name. Then you told me you got hacked and I, at your request, tweeted that you did try to conceal his name and you were hacked. How the heck is that letting you get crucified??? How the heck is that lying???
What you fail to understand is that people who work in a capacity as counselors to victims, sometimes are prevented from or loathe to reveal who they are counseling, especially to the media. That means you. So, if you put two and two together, John, you should be able to realize why Chris did not disclose to you specific information from V2. That is why he spoke to you in only generic terms. I thought you were trustworthy enough to tell you the source, now you're calling me a liar because Chris had to maintain the anonymity of his source. If you were doing the same thing as a journalist, you would call it professionalism. At that point in time you did the right thing. Why are you being so offensive now???
I have repeatedly told the people on Twitter that 1. I told you that if V2 had voluntarily published his own name then I didn't think it was wrong or illegal to publish it. and 2. That I later learned indirect info from V2 that he wanted privacy. And 3. That you did agree to, and attempted to, hide his name but you were hacked.
You knew it wasn't direct info that I had, it was second hand, that is why I put you directly in touch with Chris. He had the direct info. He was just not in a position to tell you that fact without violating his word or his profession. So, he told you generic info.
If you don't remember it that way, so be it. Chris and whoever saw my tweet about your efforts at the time will back me up. Chris informed me that V2 wanted his name kept secret at that time when you were about to go on, because he felt it was an imminent crisis that he wanted to avert. He knew he couldn't un-ring the bell. So he asked me to reach out to you and stop you. Damn… why can't you see the truth when it is right in front of your eyes?
What is it that you think happened that justifies you calling me a liar and a coward?
Stop calling me those things.
On Sep 17, 2013, at 11:53 PM, "John Ziegler" <[email protected]> wrote:
You are either completely full of crap or you have the most rationalized memory I have ever heard of.

You told me 15 minutes before going on CNN that "V2 is having a hard time with this and I would like you to not use the name." That is a fact and that was also a lie. You can blame it on Chris, but that is what you told me and it was a total lie.

Chris had no contact at all with V2. I don't know if you have convinced yourself that Chris and you didn't perpetrate a lie, but it was very clear to me that Chris never had any contact with anyone remotely related to V2.

Then, after having changed my entire plan on CNN and having my head fucked with by you (dramatically impacting how that show went), I asked you if it was a good idea to offer V2 to speak to me and explain his position. You said yes, but that was another lie because, obviously, it turned out Chris had no actual contact with V2 or his attorney.

Then, based on your lies, I put out a statement explaining what I was doing and TMZ (along with many who followed) portrayed me as a dirt bad for "blackmailing" a victim into doing a "interview" with me. You sat by and did nothing.

I had to beg you to send one wimpified tweet to just prove that V2's name on the website occurred by mistake. That is where your cowardice comes in (all your actions at this time were clearly motivated by fear of the reaction of your fellow victims rights terrorists).

You have very little credibility with me any more Jim. I have caught you in too many lies and your work is simply so shoddy/illogical that I presume you are either lying or wrong about everything, For instance, where the hell did you get the idea (as you wrote on Twitter) that we were introduced by Scott Paterno for you to vet my work? That is a flat out lie or another example of how, at best, you are remembering things the way you want to.

This was the most important series of events in the history of my career and my already outstanding memory is crystal clear about all of this.

As for the case itself, you simply had a very poor knowledge base from which to write your report. This was not your fault because the story of V2 was not known then and nor was the fact that most of the victims, contrary to your theory, did indeed clearly prostitute their stories for money. You were just assuming that what everyone else was saying must be true.

Here's the reality Jim... I don't like Jerry Sandusky. My association with him has destroyed my career and damaged my life. I think he probably engaged in a lot of inappropriate touching (there is a legit author now writing a book that he is totally innocent, but I have told them that I don't currently think that is totally true), but I am now almost positive he never had "sex" with any of those boys. The evidence that he did is pathetic.

V1 was horrendous in his 3 grand jury appearances and is taking money from PSU (and suddenly making up stories on their campus) after saying clearly he doesn't blame them. He also got arrested for statutory rape. His credibility is shot.

V2 said nothing sexual ever happened and has not given a post settlement interview which means he will never speak publicly about this (or change that story) or he is writing a book which will vindicate my version of events (because a book doing anything else wouldn't be viable).

V3 no sex

V4 there is a tape of investigators conspiring with his attorney to lie to him to get him to claim sex.

V5 no sex and he is clearly lying/changing his story so he got more PSU money.

V6 no sex and an incident free 12 year relationship with JS.

V7 no sex

V8 doesn't exist (though I think it could be Allan and Allan doesn't know it) and the date destroys the credibility of the whole story

V9 only one who claims clear anal rape. Never given the exam which could have proven it, no description of Jerry's penis, huge logistical issues with the alleged timing, and he came forward after it was clear everyone was getting paid.

V10 a criminal and drug addict who never told anyone of his abuse, came forward after the free money and testified abuse occurred in a car that the Sanduskys clearly never owned.

Everything Jerry said is consistent with the chaste pedophile theory. And, unlike Michael Jackson there was zero:

Allegations of pay offs, use of alcohol, use of pornography, use of suggestive language, descriptions of his penis.

Dottie is totally convinced he is innocent and she is NOT delusional. She knows this case at least as well as you did when you wrote your report. Her life would be FAR easier if she threw Jerry under the bus, but she hasn't at all. Why Jim?

I did exactly what you told me to in trying to get Jerry to confess. You said it usually works and that I did a good job. Why did he only confess to exactly what I think he did (boundary pushing)?!

Jim, you blew this case and Paterno's last chance at exoneration. You probably didn't have enough info and presumed wrongly that this case is the same as all others, but it is not. There has never been a case where the victims were more assured of media protection and free money than this one. They didn't totally make up their stories, but they greatly exaggerated them to please those who questioned them and for the money.

I know you will never have the courage to admit this, especially not publicly (even though I think you know it is possible I am right), but that is the truth of this matter.

Thanks for reading.

John Ziegler

Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim <[email protected]>
To: talktozig <[email protected]>
Sent: Wed, Sep 18, 2013 2:20 am
Subject: Re: Twitter
It wasn't a lie. Chris told me, a trusted colleague, what he could not tell you, a journalist. If you can't get that through your head then stop bothering me. I don't want to hear any more of this crap. I won't read anything so don't bother sending. Have a nice life...

Sent from my iPhone

-----Original Message-----
From: John Ziegler <[email protected]>
To: efbeye <[email protected]>
Sent: Wed, Sep 18, 2013 10:33 am
Subject: Re: Twitter


This is email is hilarious and very telling Jim. This is your "response" to a highly substantive email from someone who got screwed over by his extensive interaction with you and whom you know has more information on this case than you?
Perhaps you are conveniently forgetting the reality, but your "friend" (actually a victim's rights terrorist) Chris told me point blank that he never had any contact with Victim 2 and that I was told that simply to get me to reconsider saying his name. I told you this at the time in no uncertain terms.
If this is any indication of what kind of investigator you really are, I am now totally convinced that you are a fraud who blew this case in very significant and harmful ways and, judging from your sudden fear of discussing it, you know this to be true.
I am very sorry I put so much trust in you as a person and as a professional. But I am even sadder that you lacked the courage to tell the real truth of this entire matter.
John Ziegler
[email protected]