For seven months, Freeh has steadfastly refused to comment on reactions to his report. In a one-page statement released Sunday, Freeh forcefully defends his work, saying that "e-mails and contemporary documents from 2001 show that ... four of the most powerful officials at Penn State agreed not to report Sandusky's activity to public officials."

Freeh also pointed out that Paterno declined an opportunity to speak with his investigators.

"Although Mr. Paterno was willing to speak with a news reporter and his biographer at that time, he elected not to speak with us. We also asked Mr. Paterno's attorney to provide us with any evidence that he and his client felt should be considered. The documents provided were included in our report."

In the emphatic defense of his work, Freeh does not address many of the specific criticisms made by the Paterno family report.

But he calls it self-serving, saying, "I stand by our conclusion that four of the most powerful people at Penn State failed to protect against a child sexual predator harming children for over a decade."

The Paterno family report's authors made 10 conclusions after their review:

• No evidence exists that Paterno concealed critical information about Sandusky.

• Paterno, "based on a review of all available evidence, including discussions with attorneys representing Curley, Schultz and Spanier made no attempt to hide any information, hinder or impede any investigation or limit the number of people who were informed of" one the key incidents in the Sandusky scandal. In that 2001 incident, then-assistant coach Mike McQueary witnessed the assault of a boy in the shower by Sandusky and told Paterno about it the next day.

• No evidence exists that a desire to avoid bad publicity ever motivated Paterno.

• That the Freeh report "ignored decades of expert research and analysis of the appropriate way to understand and investigate a child sexual victimization case. Consequently, the Freeh report missed a tremendous opportunity to educate the public regarding the behavior of 'nice-guy' acquaintance child molesters."

• Freeh's investigators "produced a report that fit their expectations despite contrary evidence or a more reasonable interpretation."

• The report was "oversold to the public, and Penn State officials, the NCAA and other bodies detrimentally relied upon it. The limitations of the investigation, which were numerous and defining, were not adequately explained or understood."

• Sandusky was an exceptionally effective manipulator and deceiver ... One of the most respected child sexual victimization experts in the world has concluded that Joe Paterno, like many others, did not recognize Jerry Sandusky as a child molester after the 2001 incident."

• Freeh investigators' access to vital documents and critical witnesses was severely limited. "These limitations, which were understated or ignored in the report, call into question the legitimacy of the entire report."

• The Freeh report is "uniformly biased" against Paterno, and its authors "ascribe motives to people they never met or interviewed and interpret ambiguous documents with a clarity and decisiveness that is impossible to justify."

• One major flaw in the Freeh report is that it does not follow a typical standard of courtroom examinations and independent investigations -- the consideration of a person's lifetime record of "moral conduct and altruism." It treats Paterno's long life "as if it were irrelevant to the case."

According to Paterno family attorney Wick Sollers, most concerning to the family is what happened after the Freeh report was released. Sollers said Freeh did not allow the Paterno family or its representatives to reply "before he announced them as gospel at a national press conference."

Penn State students gathered in July to watch ex-FBI director Louis Freeh present his report on the school's handling of the Jerry Sandusky scandal. AP Photo/Gene J. Puskar

Sollers, in a news release Sunday, quickly responded to Freeh's statement.

"Mr. Freeh's attack on the report this morning should trouble everyone who wants the truth on the Sandusky scandal," Sollers said. "He criticizes a report he obviously hasn't had time to read and consider. And he refuses to address the critical factual and procedural failures in his own report, particularly his flawed conclusions which have only added to this tragedy.

"Being angry does not constitute a defense of poor work," the Sunday statement continues. "A failure to consider the facts carefully is exactly the problem our expert analysis highlights. Everyone, including Mr. Freeh, should take the time to study this report."

Penn State, through a public relations firm, also relayed its reaction to the Paterno family report in a statement Sunday, recounting in brief detail the context in which the Freeh probe was launched.

"As a result of the investigation, 119 recommendations were made to Penn State in areas such as safety and governance," the statement says. "To date, the University has implemented a majority of those recommendations."

The school's statement, released through PR agent David La Torre, goes on to say the school intends to put in place nearly all the recommendaitions by the end of 2013.

"It is understandable and appreciated that people will draw their own conclusions and opinions from the facts uncovered in the Freeh report," the Penn State statement reads.

For its part, the NCAA said it would "stand by our previous statements on this matter and do not have anything further to share at this time."

Ten days after the Freeh report was released, Penn State removed Paterno's statue outside Beaver Stadium. The next day, the NCAA hit Penn State and Paterno with an unprecedented string of penalties relating to the scandal: a university fine of $60 million, the vacation of 112 victories from 1998-2011, a four-year postseason ban, scholarship losses and other sanctions. The NCAA acknowledged using the Freeh report to mete out penalties instead of doing its own investigation.

With the wins from 1998-2011 vacated, Paterno moved from 409 to 298, dropping him from first to 12th on the winningest NCAA football coach list.

The Paterno family report focuses mostly on Paterno but also states that some Freeh conclusions about Spanier, Schultz, and Curley were misguided.

Sollers declined to say how much the family paid for the report but noted "It does not approach what the Board of Trustees paid to the Freeh group."

As to whether the Paternos are considering filing a lawsuit against Penn State, the Freeh group and/or the NCAA, he said it was "too early to tell" and that, "We're evaluating all the legal options at this stage of the game."

Last month, Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett filed a federal lawsuit against the NCAA, saying it violated antitrust laws when it handed down sanctions against Penn State. The NCAA has filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit.