The FCC has revoked the license of Roger Wahl’s Oldies “QZ 93.3” WQZS Meyersdale PA.
The revocation ends the saga over the station that began with Wahl’s guilty plea in July 2020 to charges of trying to trying to solicit male strangers to rape his female friend facilitated through WQZS. He also secretly took nude photos of a woman inside her home using a concealed camera he installed in her bathroom, impersonated the woman on an online dating site, sent the nude photos of the woman to at least one man whom he, posing as the woman, connected with through that site, and posing as the woman, solicited the man to have sexual relations with her. Upon learning of the Pennsylvania State Police investigation, Mr. Wahl deleted the nude photos from his mobile phone and deleted the communications he made via the online dating site.
The station was designated to a license revocation hearing in October 2021 to determine “whether he possesses the requisite character qualifications to remain a Commission licensee”. Last August FCC Administrative Law Judge Jane Hinckley Halprin dismissed the hearing for Wahl’s failure to comply through the course of the proceedings or follow orders issued by the judge.
The judge’s decision states:
Mr. Wahl’s conviction for criminal use of a communication facility, a third-degree felony, by itself merits revocation of his license. Any felony conviction casts doubt on an applicant’s or licensee’s character. The propensity to comply with the law generally is relevant to character qualifications, and an applicant or licensee’s willingness to violate other laws, and, in particular, to commit felonies, is indicative of whether the applicant or licensee will conform to the Commission’s rules or policies. This conviction, which concerned acts intended to harm—and causing actual harm to—an individual, disqualifies Mr. Wahl as a licensee on the basis of character defect.
Mr. Wahl’s four misdemeanor convictions form an independent basis for revoking his license. The Commission has the discretion to consider serious misdemeanor convictions in appropriate cases, and this is such a case. Mr. Wahl pleaded guilty to an array of misdemeanor criminal offenses (identity theft, unlawful dissemination of an intimate image, recklessly endangering another person, and tampering with evidence) based on misconduct involving multiple actions over a period of time designed to harm his victim. Mr. Wahl then sought to evade responsibility for those actions. We find that these misdemeanor convictions directly implicate his character qualifications. In particular, the facts surrounding his conviction for identity theft show him to be deceitful both because he concealed a camera in the victim’s bathroom and because he then impersonated his victim on an online dating site. His conviction for unlawful dissemination of an intimate image also shows him to be untruthful, as he assumed the victim’s identity when disseminating her image—and these same deceitful acts formed the basis for his conviction for recklessly endangering another person. Further, his conviction for tampering with evidence by attempting to conceal his earlier misdeeds buttresses the conclusion that he is untruthful and lacks the character to be a licensee.
We also find that Mr. Wahl’s station license should be revoked because of his attempt to deceive another government agency, as evidenced by his conviction for tampering with evidence. Acts of “concealment, evasion, and other failures to be fully informative” to a governmental unit equate to fraudulent representations. The facts supporting Mr. Wahl’s guilty plea state that Mr. Wahl deleted the communications he made via the online dating site upon learning of the Pennsylvania State Police investigation, and he likewise deleted the nude photos of the woman from his mobile phone. These efforts at concealment and evasion in the face of a government investigation merit revocation of his license.
Thus, Mr. Wahl’s felony conviction, his misdemeanor convictions, and his fraudulent misconduct before a government agency each establish that his character falls short of the standard described in the Character Qualifications Policy Statement—particularly in light of the factors the Commission considers when making such determinations. His conduct was adjudicated to be entirely willful, comprising a sequence of acts performed over time and calculated to harm his victim. The court in the criminal case acknowledged their seriousness of these acts. And even though Mr. Wahl has typically complied with FCC rules and policies, the record reflects no efforts by Mr. Wahl to remedy these wrongs. As fewer than three years have passed since his convictions, the Commission cannot hold that his character has been rehabilitated. Revocation of Mr. Wahl’s license is thus warranted pursuant to section 312(a)(2) of the Act.
