Friday, November 22

"Hack" investigator Freeh, the OAG, and Sara Ganim Covered Up DPW's & TSM's Disregard for Child Protection

DPW and The Second Mile put children in harm's way after Sandusky lost his clearance to work with children.  The OAG, Freeh, and Sara Ganim all worked to hide that fact from the public.

Ray Blehar

According to the trial transcripts in the Commonwealth v. Sandusky case, Jerry Sandusky was indicated for child abuse on or about 15 January 2009.  As a result, Sandusky had an "indicated" report of  child abuse on his record and did not have a clearance to work with children.  Sandusky appealed the report on February 27, 2009 and eventually withdrew the appeal.  Under the Public Welfare Code, appeals are adjudicated in 30 days, thus Sandusky should not have been interacting with children after March 27, 2009.

The trial testimony also revealed that Gerald Rosmilia, the director of Clinton County Children and Youth Services contacted TSM on 20 November 2008 to inform them of Sandusky's investigation and that Clinton County CYS was severing ties with the charity.   Also, on November 20th, Clinton County CYS psychologist, Mike Gillum contacted Central Mountain High School (CMHS) and informed them to ban Sandusky from school property while he was under investigation.  Gillum's notification conforms with Pa. 055§ 3490.53 (b) which requires protection of children while Sandusky was under investigation.  While there is evidence that protective steps were taken with regard to CMHS, no evidence exists that those steps were taken by The Second Mile (TSM).

According to two board members of TSM, Sandusky abruptly resigned from the charity in November of 2009 without providing a reason for doing so.  According to press reports, the majority of the TSM Board was in the dark about Sandusky's investigation and the charity continued to use Sandusky for fundraising past his "official" public retirement in the Fall of 2010.

However, the primary issue at hand was that TSM and DPW did not limit Sandusky's access to children after he was indicated for abuse after January 2009.  Although the charity has made various statements about Sandusky's role with the charity after the Spring of 2009, there is evidence he continued to interact with children and that the OAG, hack investigator Louis Freeh, and Sara Ganim (and other reporters) did their best to obscure that fact from the public.

Sandusky's Access to Children After Being Indicated 

It bears repeating that access to children, not facilities, is the critical access that enables child sexual abuse.  The organizations who provided Sandusky with access to children during his 14 plus years of committing abuse were TSM, CMHS, and Pennsylvania DPW.  Those three organizations had knowledge that Sandusky was indicated as a child abuser but let him continue to access children.  There is no evidence that PSU was ever told about the abuse finding in January 2009.

Spring/Summer 2009.  Victim 9, whose date of birth is 7/29/93, testified during the trial that he stayed at Sandusky's home starting in 2005 and ending in 2009, when he was 16 years of age (ref. Commonwealth v. Sandusky, 6-13-2012, pps 230-231).   He joined TSM at age 12 or 13 and remained in the organization until age 16, thus the charity did not prevent Sandusky from interacting with him after they were notified about the investigation in November 2008 or after Sandusky was indicated in January 2009.  Victim 9 also testified (page 236) that he continued to be sexually abused by Sandusky up until the age of 16, which means Sandusky was in contact with him after he was indicated for abuse.

June 26, 2009.  Sandusky quit his coaching position at Central Mountain High School, joking "I didn't want to play against State College."  While Gillum recommended Sandusky be banned immediately from CMHS on 20 November 2008, it appears that he stayed involved with the football program until the summer.

January - July 2009:  Sandusky continued contacting Aaron Fisher by telephone during this period, according to OAG Agent Anthony Sassano (page 5, November 2011 Grand Jury Presentment).

July 12-15, 2009*.  Sandusky Associates, his private company, held a football camp for children in grades 4 through 9 at PSU Behrend Campus.  See enclosed brochure here.
*requires additional information to confirm.

September 2011:  Sandusky was observed by a member of the State College media attending a Bellefonte High School football game with two children as his guests.

September 2011. Victim 9 (then 18 years old)  and a friend attended a PSU football game with Sandusky in September 2011 (Commonwealth v. Sandusky, pps. 241, 242).

These are the handful of incidents where Sandusky's interaction has been documented.  Given that Sandusky did not officially announce his retirement from TSM until September 2010, it is likely that he accessed children at various TSM fund raising events and other activities while remaining the "face" of TSM.

The OAG's Cover-Up

Aside from the notoriously false grand jury presentment that inflamed the public against PSU for allegedly enabling Sandusky's abuse and then omitted DPW and Centre County CYS's roles in the 1998 Sandusky investigation, the OAG also modified the May 18, 2012 Bill of Particulars to change the ending of time frame of abuse of Victim 9 from 2009 to December 2008.  See exhibit below.

Victim 9 testified that his abuse occurred up until age 16, which confirmed that it happened past December 2008, past when Sandusky was indicated for abuse (January 2009), and past when Sandusky lost his clearance to work with children (circa March 27, 2009).  It appears the December 2008 date was contrived by the OAG to cover-up Sandusky's access to children provided by TSM and DPW after he was indicated.

However, what is indisputable in this case is the inordinate amount of time it took for a grand jury subpoena to be issued for the TSM's records.  While every victim in this case met Sandusky through his work with TSM, the subpoena for TSM's records was not issued until January 2011 -- 25 months into the case.  After the subpoena was issued, it was reported that the records from 2000 to 2003 were missing.  The grand jury issued a contempt motion over the missing records but dropped it in October 2011.

To date, no charges have been filed against TSM.

Sara Ganim's Cover-Up

There were a number of instances in which Sara Ganim slanted her reporting away from placing any responsibility on TSM or DPW.  I analyzed one of her most biased articles here, which accused Penn State of hiding the psychology reports of John Seasock and Alycia Chambers from DPW program representative, Jerry Lauro.  The 1998 police report proved that Lauro set up the second evaluation, therefore he obviously had knowledge of the evaluation.  Also, Dr. Alycia Chambers reported she released her report (orally) to the DPW on May 7, 1998, thus PSU did not "hide" that report from Lauro.

However, where Ganim reveals her complicity in the cover-up is when comparing her earlier writings, that referenced Sandusky's retirement occurring in Fall of 2010 and her August 2012 series on TSM, where she states Sandusky was not permitted by TSM to access children after the finding of abuse in November 2008.

From the article:

On Nov. 25, 2008, Jerry Sandusky told Second Mile leader Jack Raykovitz that he had been accused of something inappropriate by a Clinton County boy.
Sandusky said the accusation involved touching, over clothing, and he insisted he was innocent.
Raykovitz, a well-known and respected child psychologist in central Pennsylvania, immediately removed Sandusky from all events involving children, and strongly urged him to stay away from children outside of charity functions, too.
For months, Sandusky told Raykovitz he was going to fight that Childline ruling. But when Sandusky dropped the appeal later in 2009, Raykovitz knew Sandusky needed to cut off all ties with The Second Mile.
If he did not resign, Raykovitz told Sandusky, he would go to the executive board members and have them do it on his behalf.

The evidence I provided earlier in this article proves it really didn't happen this way at all.  Sandusky continued to have access to Victim 9 (at a minimum) and continued to interact with children outside the charity.  By August of 2012, numerous press articles detailing Sandusky's activities had been published, some of which highlighted Sandusky's access to children after he was indicated.  And Ganim herself reported that Raykovitz and a small circle of TSM board members decided to not communicate the allegations of abuse to other members of the board.

However in Part 4 of the 5 Part Series, Ganim does some sleight of hand by using an irrelevant link that recounted the 1998 investigation (rather than the 2008 investigation) when discussing TSM's requirement for putting "safety plans" in place -- ignoring TSM's repeat offense of not putting a safety plan in place.

More from Ganim:
But in 1998, when a six-week police investigation took place on Penn State’s campus after a boy — now known as Victim 6 — and his mother told police that Jerry Sandusky hugged him during a shower.
The state Department of Welfare got involved and conducted an investigation simultaneous to the criminal one. Both ended with no finding of wrongdoing after then-District Attorney Ray Gricar decided there wasn’t enough evidence.
Regardless of how it ended, there is a state law that says that if anyone associated with a child care agency is under investigation for child abuse, the agency and the welfare department are supposed to work together to develop a written safety plan until the investigation is complete.

Nowhere in this series does Ganim make mention of TSM working with Clinton County CYS to put a protection plan in place as required by the PWC in 2008.   At best, she made a single, unsupported, and provably false statement that Raykovitz immediately removed him from all events involving children.

Freeh's Cover-Up

Chapter 7 of the Freeh Report contains several references to Sandusky holding camps, but truncates the years to end Sandusky's participation in them by 2008, which would support that TSM and DPW did their jobs and kept Sandusky away from children.   However, Freeh may not have been accurate in his first attempt (page 105) to truncate the end year to 2008 for the camp held at PSU Behrend.

The year 2008 is referenced with endnote 594 that stated:  "Sandusky was scheduled to conduct a camp in 2009, but his wife called the campus and cancelled the camp."

As Recently As 2009, Jerry Sandusky Was Running An Overnight Football Camp For Kids On Penn State Campuses
That is a rather unusual footnote because it does not reveal the source of the information, such as an interview or e-mail and the title of the person who provided this information.  However, that is a consistent practice throughout Freeh's bogus report.  The person or persons at PSU Behrend who would have known this information are the Athletic Director, Brian Streeter, or Assistant Athletic Director, Stacy Pondo (who is referenced as the contact in the ad at right).

Athletic Director Brian Streeter told that "After 2009 is the first we heard of it."  Later articles that followed and that didn't quote Streeter said the camps ran until 2008.  At the time this article went to print, I was awaiting confirmation via a check of billing records.

Freeh also stated (on page 108) that TSM held summer camps on the PSU campus from 1998 to 2008.  However, the IRS 990 forms for TSM ending August 31, 2009 and 2010 show that TSM paid $119,592 and $124,587, respectively,  for food and lodging to PSU for its camps. 

Clearly, those camps took place on PSU's campus in 2009 and 2010.  For the year ending August 31, 2011, TSM paid $149,690 for camp food and lodging, however it did not state where the camp took place or if Sandusky was involved.  Thus, it appears the 2008 cut-off may also have been to protect TSM from  liability for allowing Sandusky to interact with children in the event lawsuits are filed from victims for those years.

2ndmile_0829_jcw_17798 Finally, the paragraph (page 108) regarding Sandusky's participation in the Friend Program, stated that a TSM  program director last saw Sandusky participating in any TSM activities in 2008.   While this statement may be true for this unnamed program director, many other people saw Sandusky participating in TSM golf tournaments in 2010 and 2011.  Thus, the program director's knowledge appears to be trumped by the people who witnessed Sandusky at the golf tournaments.  


Sandusky's continued access to children after he was indicated for child abuse demonstrates how Pennsylvania's child protection system lacks an effective method to keep perpetrators like Sandusky away from children.   However, what is equally disturbing is that the former occupants of the PA OAG, Louis Freeh, and Sara Ganim (and the media) were complicit in attempting to keep this information from finding its way into the public.


The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania avoided embarrassment and having to establish a victim's fund.
Sara Ganim got a Pulitzer Prize...and a new job at CNN.
Freeh got $8.8 million (and counting) plus free advertising for his phony investigation racket.

Read more here:


  1. None of Freeh's drivel has ever been substantiated. Quite the opposite.

  2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  3. I thought I'd let everyone know that I deleted your nonsense. Please go back and have fun with your fellow trolls in the PennLive comment section. If you show up here again, I'll call for your wife Julia to come and get you. :-)

  4. Please do! I've got nothing against green chicks. If they're good enough for Captain Kirk, they're good enough for me. :)

    Ray would you come over and detail your rationale for the following quotes? We sure do miss you. PS...please leave your poodle at home. :)

    "I have plenty of sympathy for child sex abuse victims. I have no sympathy for liars and frauds."

    "Perhaps if you can identify a legimate (sic) rape victim, I could show concern. There aren't any."

    "You believed this crap that a lying prosecutor called evidence. And you also believe that the gold diggers showing up at PSU have been abused."

    - Ray Blehar

    1. Glad you asked.

      From page 143 of the interviewing guidelines for child sexual abuse cases:

      The interview of
      an adolescent boy victim of sexual exploitation is extremely difficult at best. The
      stigma of homosexuality and embarrassment over victimization greatly increase the
      likelihood the victim may deny or misrepresent the sexual activity. The investigator must accept the fact that even if a victim discloses, the information is likely to
      be incomplete minimizing his involvement and responsibility and, in some cases,
      exaggerating the offender’s.

      Unreliable information and false victim
      denials can be obtained from “perfect” interviews and reliable information and
      valid disclosures can be obtained even from highly imperfect interviews. This fact
      can be lost in excessive focus on how the interview was conducted. This in no way
      denies the fact that repetitive, suggestive, or leading interviews are real problems
      and can produce false or inaccurate information. The process by which information
      is obtained is important, but the focus should not be on whether an interview was
      conducted “improperly” but whether it resulted in unreliable information.

      But more to your point, these passages from page 146 explain my comments:

      In my opinion victims who
      are seduced, manipulated, or engaged in compliant
      behavior often lie to varying degrees to make their
      victimization more socially acceptable or please an
      adult. Occasionally children lie because they are angry
      and want to get revenge on somebody. Some children,
      sadly, lie about sexual victimization to get attention
      and forgiveness. A few children may even lie to get
      money or as part of a lawsuit. This can sometimes be
      influenced by pressure from their parents/guardians.
      Objective investigators must consider and evaluate all these possibilities. It is extremely
      important to recognize, however, that because children might lie about part of their
      victimization does not mean the entire allegation is necessarily a lie and they are not
      victims. Based on my experience the lying of child victims who engaged in compliant
      behavior concerning varying aspects of their victimization is so common it can be
      corroborative. As previously discussed acquaintance-exploitation cases often involve
      complex dynamics and numerous incidents that often make it difficult to say it is all
      true or false. Disclosures by victims may involve some false allegations. In spite of what
      a defense attorney may argue, however, that does not necessarily mean it is a totally
      false allegation. Allegations must be evaluated in totality based on the type of case.

      In addition just because a child is not lying does not mean he or she is making
      an accurate statement. Children might be telling you what they have come to believe
      happened to them, even though it might not be literally true.

      So there you have it, right from the Child Molester Investigator's Bible.

      The Sandusky case was investigated by a NARCOTICS AGENT. This person did nt have the training or experience to understand what was true and what wasn't true.

    2. And I have no intention to waste my time explaining this to the morons, haters, and pedophile enablers that live in the comment section on PennLive.

    3. WE'RE the pedophile enablers? You sure showed us!

      Well played, Raymond, well played! How do you do the voo-doo that you do?

      I'll be sure to stay away, lest you taunt us a second time-ah...

    4. Anyone who is unwilling to admit the Commonwealth's role in enabling Sandusky's abuse and the need to reform the system - which you and the other trolls steadfastly refuse to acknowledge - is enabling child sexual abuse.

      So, yes, you are a pedophile enabler. I'm sure there are probably a few pedophiles and NAMBLA members in your fold over there who want nothing more than the failing system to allow them to operate as they do today.

    5. Where have YOU been? This congregation has been singing that hymn from the beginning!

      I've always stated that the WHOLE DISGUSTING LOT of them were responsible in enabling Sandusky and I can't think of anyone who believes otherwise.

      Are you kidding? I'd love to see them ALL hanging from the business end of a rope!

      However, the lack of action of one, does not excuse the lack of action of another!

      They are ALL COMPLICIT and ALL GUILTY of doing NOTHING to stop Ziggy's buddy, and no matter how much you and Ziggy keep pointing your fingers at everyone else, it will NEVER change that!

      The across the board lack of action is historical FACT!

    6. I'm not buying that for a minute. The PennLive troll squad is out in full force protecting DPW and excusing its lack of an investigation in 1998.

      As for ALL guilty, show me ONE piece of evidence that proves a failure to report abuse by PSU. You don't have it and neither does the Commonwealth.

      The deal is that PSU reported it and DPW didn't lift a finger.

      Why don't you talk with Jim Singer about his case? Or the families in Centre County who had the same thing happened when they complained and got ignored.

      You are going to get a big surprise when you find out how the Sandusky cover-up operated - and four names you won't see are Paterno, Curley, Schultz, and Spanier.

  5. This is what i said on Nov 6th

    Dear Mr Shuttlesworth,

    I find you nasty and mean spirited, JZ & Ray don't attack victims.
    I wish/hope your comments are your last.
    I further hope that your last comment is deleted by 6 PM so that
    The good people of the Commonwealth, the other 49 states & the
    world don't have to read your spewing stuff!

    Chuck O'Connor
    Inside the Pale of Happy Valley

    This is what i am saying today

    You are still yelling at Ray and calling John Ziegler names.
    It's is just unnecessary.

    Judas please ---> In the words of Archie Bunker to his Wife Edith
    "Stifle yourself!"

  6. Ray, this guy is an a$$, just ignore what he says. He wants you to argue with him, it validates him. If he posts, ignore and/or delete it, pretty simply. He's not trying to have an honest debate, just trying to get a reaction. For god sakes, his profile says he's from Zihuantenajo, Mexico, which is the town Andy Dufresne escaped to in Shawshank.

  7. Judas, baby: Nice to see the devil visiting this blog to keep Ray honest. Having been involved with inner city brats, I know what lies they are capable of telling. Didn't get the goodies or attention they wanted...poor babies! I've witnessed ex spouses make false sexual abuse allegations just for the fun of a little revenge...sometimes it even worked. You should have been in LA when Micheal Jackson was acquitted of child abuse because the jury determined that the victim's parents pimped him out. Singing and dancing to celebrate the child's demise. No outrage anywhere. Where oh where were the self righteous victims advocates? Your ilk seems incapable of critical though or objective analysis. You don't want to be confused with the facts.

    Who knows what evil lurks in the minds of men? I do!

  8. Ray, here's an interesting thought that came to me about the "janitor witness" fabrication. Isn't this actually an abuse of a mentally handicapped person's rights by the state of PA? To concoct a story involving, and using the name of a retarded citizen, as a witness to a rape that didn't occur is not only immoral, but completely illegal. To just force a mentally challenged person into a falsely created serious allegation like this, with or without their consent, is nothing short of egregious criminal behavior. This act in itself should be enough for Kane to move in immediately and arrest Fina, Corbett, and Linda Kelly.
    I was an advocate for retarded citizens rights when I was just out of college, and too many of these people are made into "witnesses" to things that didn't occur. I've seen it on a much smaller scale many times.
    Anyway, my point is, maybe this could be the first illegality to pursue against Corbett's corrupt throng. It would help to eventually expose their more hidden crimes against PSU. Can you pressure Kane to take swift legal action based on this evidence that you exposed?

  9. Anyone else see the USA today article "New unit to investigate Child Abuse"? It's a needed addition of checks and balances that Kane is adding to PA state government. It's a good thing, but just like I thought, there's not yet an acknowledgement that the blame was illegally and slanderously placed on a university instead of a dysfunctional and corrupt PA state government.
    Kane says, "it shouldn't take an embarrassment on the Commonwealth to protect our children". Yes, so true. But what's the embarrassment? Is it the fact that an Attorney General engaged in abandonment of duty to arrest Sandusky for a total of 10 years? And then illegally slandered a fabulous university for the corrupt and neglectful actions of state government officials? Kane, you are still covering up with your "on going" investigation. "On going" means no end. Which also means no justice will be brought against the immoral, and corrupt state officials that wrongly and publicly placed blame on innocent people. These officials have further proved their guilt as their lies are being exposed by Mr. Blehar.
    We, as the people, don't want an "on going" investigation into the crooks that have severely hurt innocent people. We want justice. That's something you were elected to uphold. Now prove that you can and will treat elected officials the same way you would treat us if we broke the law.

    1. Truthseeker,
      One of the realities of performing an investigation is that when you get leads, you follow them. I believe that the Moulton investigation is ongoing because his team continues to get new leads on the case that require investigation.

      The latest from Kane is good news and I took it as an admission that the OAG and police investigation of Sandusky was an embarrassment to the Commonwealth. We all know it was.

      I would rather have a comprehensive wrap up where all these crooks are rounded up instead of a fast investigation that catches a few small fish.

    2. You're a good man Ray. I'm a bit more cynical, and maybe I should be less so. But it's impatience and frustration that fuels my cynicism. This new Kane announcement is a good thing for sure. But it's a bit unclear to me what she is referring to as the "embarrassment". Did she mean that PSU is an embarrassment? Or, did she mean the state negligence is an embarrassment? I think she was careful not to explain too much.

      Thanks for your response and your tireless efforts.

    3. I believe she meant the 3 year investigation of Sandusky was an embarassment. And it was, so she formed the new unit to investigate CSA.

      I pointed out what should have happened when I wrote report 3 -- a multi-disciplinary task force should have been established for the Sandusky investigation. We'll need to see the details about this new unit to see if it is truly multi-disciplinary.