Monday, November 11

The Failure to Report Child Abuse Ruse in the Sandusky Case

The Office of Attorney General, Penn State, Louis Freeh, and so-called victim's advocates want the public to believe Sandusky roamed the streets because of a failure to report in 2001 - and a lot of money changed hands to promote that false narrative.

Ray Blehar

The fake investigation conducted by Louis Freeh concluded with a well choreographed press conference, where a computer glitch that was planned in advance kept the full text of the report out of everyone's hands.  However, one of the other well choreographed parts of the presser was that Louis Freeh stood in front of a large screen with the telephone number of ChildLine projected on it.

The message was being sent that the Sandusky Scandal hinged on a failure to report abuse in 2001.

Ironically, Chapter 8 of the Freeh Report, which cited the Pennsylvania child abuse reporting statute made NO FINDING that PSU officials failed to report abuse.  I found that very curious from my first review of the Freeh Report back in July, yet no one else seemed to ever ask the question how a report so damning to PSU could not make that finding.

The answer is very simple; there is no credible evidence to support that finding.

To quote Louis Freeh, the "best they could muster" was a non-specific, unauthenticated e-mail, which we have since learned was not from a forensic hard drive, but from a DVD supplied to the OAG nearly one year after the forensic evidence was turned over by Penn State.   While there was language in the e-mail regarding being "vulnerable for not reporting," it certainly is not clear if those words were typed by Graham Spanier or by someone pretending to be Graham Spanier.  Also, there is more evidence - in the form of testimony and statements - that child welfare was contacted in 2001 than there is to the contrary.

However, PSU paid $8.8 million dollars at last count for Freeh, Sporkin, and Sullivan (FSS) and their PR fim, Kekst,  to put on a show that would fool the public into believing this case was about a failure to report child abuse.

Freeh's  "dog and pony show" would also fool the public into believing the firing of Joe Paterno and Graham Spanier was justified because these men concealed Sandusky's crimes for 14 years, dating back to 1998.  Not only that, but Freeh said there were "red flags all over the place" that should have caused PSU to suspect Sandusky's abuse.

Ironically, the 1998 investigation was conducted by Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare officials, who, based on the evidence overlooked many "red flags" of possible child sex abuse.  Those signs were chronicled in this blog post and the investigation was fully exposed as a failure in Report 1.  In addition, Report 1 also showed Freeh did his best to cover for DPW by omitting critical evidence that would have revealed how badly DPW botched the investigation.

The Attorney General's Failure to Report Ruse
The attorney general's failure to report ruse actually began with the factually challenged grand jury presentment. 

The presentment told a tale of PSU officials getting a graphic report of a molestation and then reporting the incident to the Executive Director of The Second Mile (TSM), who stated under oath that he did not report it because he was told it was fully investigated by Penn State and there was nothing there.

The presentment didn't tell the public that Dr. Jack Raykovitz was a licensed psychologist and mandatory reporter of child abuse.  Thus the public was led to believe that the PSU
Athletic Director's advice on the incident to TSM gave them cause to not report it.

However, the theatrics came into play at the press conference announcing the Sandusky charges, which featured two placards -- one of Sandusky, the alleged molester and a second placard featuring Gary Schultz and Tim Curley, charging them with perjury and failure to report.  The image was meant to tie the Sandusky scandal to Penn State and put the emphasis on failing to report abuse.

Call me cynical, but I tend to believe that TSM's campaign contributions to then AG Tom Corbett,  TSM's provision of children and youth programs across the state, and ties to PSU likely gave the charity a "get out of jail free card" in the Sandusky case.

State and County Failures
At the same time, the AG's grand jury presentment made no mention that TSM was required, by code, to be informed of the previous investigation of Sandusky in 1998.  TSM continues to deny knowing about the 1998 investigation to this day.  However, if we take TSM's word that they were not notified in 1998, then we must fault the Centre County Children and Youth Services office for not making the proper notifications in 1998.  Moreover, the police report made it clear that CYS did not take steps with TSM to protect children who were being accessed by Sandusky during the 1998 investigation.

These failures by CYS were not the only ones to occur in that investigation.  The police report also stated that a second child, who was a potential victim, was interviewed by CYS and the police without his mother or a parent present.  That was also a violation of the code.  Also, there was no evidence on the record that CYS attempted to contact the parent after the interview to inquire about her knowledge of the alleged abuse or if she would desire to file a complaint.  A Pulitzer prize winning (but factually challenged) article from the  Patriot News about the Sandusky grand jury,  stated the mother never asked her 10 year-old son about his interview with the police.   The article appears to confirm that CYS did not go back and talk with the mother after the initial interview with the child (BK).

The 1998 case was wrought with failures on the part of the Department of Public Welfare and CYS, yet the attorney general (in the grand jury presentment) said almost nothing about their respective roles in the 1998 investigation.

The Schultz file revealed that CYS, after the first day of the investigation, in which they learned of many signs of possible child sexual abuse, was "going to hold a meeting" to "decide what to do" on the morning of the second day of the investigation.  The record indicates they referred the investigation to DPW, who did a cursory review of the evidence, interviewed Sandusky, and closed their case.

However, after everything that happened in 1998, the public was led to believe that in 2001, if only PSU would have contacted child welfare, a sexual predator would have been taken off the streets.

That is truly laughable.

Given what we have learned about PA's child protection system over the last year, it is more likely that authorities were contacted and were simply more decisive about the case than in 1998.

They chose not to investigate the case -- immediately.

CYS likely rationalized that Sandusky was fully investigated in 1998.  He had been approved for foster parenthood and adoptions for two decades.  There was no reason to waste someone's time on an investigation.

The scenario above is more likely than Gary Schultz ignoring the advice of Wendell Courtney, who believed that someone at PSU contacted CYS after he had done legal research on the nature of the incident and conferenced with Schultz.

Penn State's and PCAR's Failure to Report Ruse

While I covered the phony Freeh investigation earlier in the blogpsot, PSU took another action to contaminate the public's opinion regarding child abuse reporting.

It provided a $1.5 million grant to the Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape (PCAR) to provide education about child abuse reporting to the public.  But the money did more than that.

While it is not clear if the contract was in place with PSU on 11-11-11, the Executive Director of PCAR (left, below), Delilah Rumburg, PCAR delivered a stinging indictment of Joe Paterno and PSU officials.

Ms. Rumberg's remarks about the Sandusky Scandal were typical of the many people who piled onto PSU without any of the facts during the initial days after the story broke and before any of the allegations were remotely close to being proven.

"All of the adults who knew, who suspected, who whispered in private, that failed to make those phone calls, also failed those little boys.  And now here is this frenzy, the national outrage, and the focus on the career of a football coach.  A pillar of this community, who held immense power and influence, and he chose to look away.  These things are disrespectful, insulting and shameful. 

Those little boys needed help and support back then. They are the victims of a incredibly devastating crime.  They kept silent all these years over whether they would be believed over a famous coach and the powerful institution."

As I heard this load of crap spewing from Ms. Rumberg, I was confused as to whether she believed Joe Paterno had actually committed the crimes.  I was also confused as to whether or not Ms. Rumberg was aware that Paterno had not been charged with failure to report. And the pillar of the community comment goes to show you just how out of touch Ms. Rumburg is about sexual abuse, considering that is the term used for offenders like Sandusky.

Also, how was it that Ms. Rumburg and PCAR managed to not make mention of TSM Executive Director, Dr. Jack Raykovitz or high ranking TSM board members in its message about adults looking the other way?

What came in the following month was what PSU really bought and paid for from PCAR.  PCAR ran a series of articles, again - before anything had been proven, about the "bystander approach" and PSU being "the mother of all teachable moments."

Quite frankly, the "mother of all teachable moments" in the Sandusky case is that if you have a lot of money and are willing to spend it, you can enlist the help of quasi-government officials (FSS and PCAR) to ensure that no one finds out about the truly poor record of Pennsylvania's child protection system and you can dupe the public into believing that a phone call would have stopped Sandusky.


  1. Thanks so much, Ray, for your relentless efforts to uncover and reveal the facts of this mess.

  2. Since when did the general public ever care about the safety of children born or unborn?

    During the recent Micheal Jackson lawsuit, the local LA TV stations replayed much of MJs pedophilia trials (1995, 2005). While you can read the gruesome details on Wikipedia, the behavior of the crowds outside the courtroom can never be reproduced in print: The singing and dancing in Santa Barbara when the victims disappeared with their wads of cash, the celebrations in 2005 when a jury determined that the victim's parents pimped him out so he got what he deserved, and the near riot this year when a jury determined that MJ was responsible for his own demise.

    There were no victims advocates on the streets demanding that MJs videos be removed from the Web or his CDs from store shelves. Hollywood keeps promoting MJ specials, even Ohio State among others produced tributes to him.

    MJs daughter allegedly attempted suicide because of the merciless teasing she received (your pop, the King of pop...popping 12 year old boys, that is....)

    Indeed, the Neverland Ranch was built expressly to lure young boys for overnight stays. Neither his family nor his handlers did anything to keep him away from young boys from disfunctional families with a parents more than happy to try some blackmail.

    MJ like JS was a boy lover. They never left childhood. They wanted relationships with their boys. They wanted to be good to them.

    The Second Mile, unlike Neverland, actually helped thousands of children. It was one of George Bush's Thousand Points of Light, and was listed in US News and World Report as one of the 50 best run charities in the US. It had the support of major PA businesses, many of which used that support to promote their businesses(and who contributed generously to Tom Corbett). It had a deal with PSU to give course credit to volunteer workers. The fund raising Golf Outings were as much about politics and business promotion as they were about raising money
    for the charity.

    What people knew about JS was that he was a brilliant defensive mind (a student of Dan Radikovich and Rip Engle). He and his wife were vetted for adopting children and being foster parents....a VERY rigorous process. He received a US Senatorial citation as Adoptive Parent of the Year, and the Frank Broyle Award for outstanding community service.

    Now...if someone told you that he was seen in a shower at the gym with a 14 year old boy, what would you think?

    1. And thank you, Gregory, for this insightful view.

    2. I'm trying to absorb your point here. There's lots of writing about Michael Jackson and an alluding to abortion at the start. You seem to just be saying, "what's the use?". Are you saying, because there are abortions in society, why should we care about the living? And you seem to be halfway defending Second Mile for the good they did. The good they did was a necessary mantle to get an organized sex trafficking of boys going hidden under the good. A Pennsylvania judge let Second Mile flee PA, with their records, just as fast as they could go. Now, I wonder why that is? I also wonder, why we're learning that the Freeh "report", a serious document presented to the public as factual, with recommendations for change based on those "facts", is so full of falsehoods?
      Most everyone agrees Sandusky is a pedophile. Yes, he did good things too, but like Second Mile, it was a necessary mantle he had to project to entertain his sickness.
      The old accusation of, "if you defend Paterno and PSU, you're defending child molesting", is now laughable when we see what the Freeh report is.
      I'm probably still missing your point, so let me know.

    3. It appears that Gregory Vernon is saying the media is very selective in it's outrage against the abuse of children. Abortion is 100% okay, except when an abortion clinic doctor is murdered. The Gosnell case in Philly, which has to be one of the most gruesome tales of a filthy abortion clinic which infected many women and killed many childern after birth. Let's not forget that the Gosnell case happened in Pennsylvania and that many believed it was not an isolated case. Yet, the outrage over Gosnell wasn't even a fraction of what it was for Sandusky.

      The Michael Jackson case is also one in which a well-liked celebrity got away with paying off the victims and received next to no criticism at all. As Gregory pointed out, Neverland Ranch was the ultimate pedophile playground and it was out in the open, yet no one made the connection. Michael was just an overgrown child....that excused his behavior. That excuse wasn't even considered for Sandusky.

      Sandusky and Michael Jackson are no different, but while PSU bans Sweet Caroline, Thriller continues to be played in Beaver Stadium. Can you say, "double-standard?"

      The bottom line is that the media only cares about the welfare of children when it sales newspapers. Stories about kids being abused by monsters sells. Stories about a famous football coach not doing more apparently sells too.

      Stories about children being abused and murdered by the system doesn't sell.

      Just ask Sally Jenkins or Sara Ganim.

    4. Okay, thanks Ray. This puts Mr. Verrnon's post into a better perspective for me. These are good points then about how our dysfunctional media is a huge part of the problem. Sensationalism sells. And we as a society don't really want to disrupt the sensationalism.
      Well, I can't think of any greater dirty headlines than "Governor of PA jailed for enabling Second Mile sex scandal". And, "Former FBI director, Louis Freeh, jailed for obstruction of justice in Second Mile scandal". Should sell millions of copies, I'll buy the first 100 to offer on ebay in 10 years.

  3. ...."Call me cynical, but I tend to believe that TSM's campaign contributions to then AG Tom Corbett, TSM's provision of children and youth programs across the state, and ties to PSU likely gave the charity a "get out of jail free card" in the Sandusky case."...

    Ray, this is exactly where I have been since the grand jury presentment was leaked....something is rotten in Pennsylvania....I know John Ziegler originally disclaimed "Framing Paterno" as a figurative, not literal reference...but I continue to believe that there was a defensive conspiracy to shift attention away from the Commonwealth administration so those interested parties could circle their wagons. This reeks...campaign donations...state issued grants...stalled investigations...inconsistent formal review by the BOT....the charity where it all started being allowed to flee the state... I have no doubts that Jerry Sandusky is a pedophile, but the only cover-up happened well beyond 2001, let alone 1998....Key members of the BOT sold out the university to divert attention from other interests.

    1. Yep, it's funny when you look back on the earliest reactions to the Freeh "report". Everyone tip toes around Freeh, with statements like, "in no way do I want to impugn Freeh's motives here...", and "I'm certainly not questioning Mr. Freeh's conclusions, but..". This is exactly how a high-functioning sociopath gets away with such outrageous lies. They are resting on their laurels in previously held positions in life, such as Freeh's FBI tenure, and his "your honor" status. Freeh is essentially abusing public trust to engaging in lying, cheating private racketeering. And I believe Ziegler is just giving himself a liability clause by stating the "Framing of Joe Paterno" is meant figuratively. I don't believe Ziegler really believes that along with most of the rest of us. Paterno and PSU were literally setup with the professionalism of the most ruthless Mafia Dons you can imagine. And this is our PA state government that did this to the people's beloved coach and university. It leaves me sick inside to know this level of governmental abuse against the people is allowed to exist in our great country.

    2. Bodhi,
      Unlike John Ziegler, I've called this thing a railroading from the get go. The Schultz secret file was the clincher for me. But as a refresher, here is the last paragraphs of an August 9, 2012 post.

      It appears more and more likely that Paterno, Spanier, Schultz, and Curley got railroaded to cover up for DPWs failure in 1998. It also appears that some of the operators of this railroad include PSU Counsel Cynthia Baldwin and PSU Special Task Force co-chairs Kenneth Frazier and Ronald J. Tomalis, among others, who were part of the group that decided to bring in Louis Freeh to drive nails into the coffin.
      So, the remaining question is “why?”

      Just follow the money.

    3. I think the Attorney General realized that Mike McQueary would not be credible if Dranov, Curley and Schultz testified he never told them it was sexual in 2001 so she trumped up charges against Curley and Schultz to remove them as defense witnesses.

      She couldn't charge Dranov because then she would have to charge John McQueary and that would alienate Mike McQueary and likely get him to walk back his testimony to save his father from jail.

  4. I'm a bit taken back that Ms. Rumberg made that statement. For a professional with an advanced degree to make a statement without physical evidence (or reproducible experimental data) and extensive literature references would be a death knell for a physical scientist. He/she would be torn to pieces. Maybe the rules are different for Psychology Ph.D.s. Perhaps political correctness, the antithesis of critical thought and rigorous analysis, trumps professional integrity.

    To be sure, several entities used this fiasco to settle personal vendettas. Tom Corbett dragged his feet while AG probably to allocate resources to his scandal investigations (for which he got super press coverage) and secondly to protect campaign donors on the Second Mile Board from embarrassment and possible business losses(To suggest that he did it because of PSU voters is baloney).

    Ken Frazier and Pepper Hamilton (with Freeh now as head of their executive board) are using the same intimidation tactics that they used in the Vioxx Fraud. Please note that Freeh subcontracted $$$ to Pepper Hamilton for his fraudulent representation of the data.

    I've often wondered why Dr. Dranov (urologist?) told MM to go to JP. JP had absolutely no authority to do anything, and Dranov knew that. Dranov knew Shultz, so why not go straight there?

    MM's slapping sounds also curious. When I was a kid (even in the dorm at PSU, hee,hee), we slapped towels, put soapy water on the floor, and threw water polo balls at each other in the showers. If I heard slapping sound, I would think a bit of towel tag or locker room dodge-ball was going on. I would NEVER think of sex. Associating a sound with an activity is a conditioned response. Where did MM make that association? And how does he differentiate a sexual slap from a high five? I think MM would go insane watching a Three Stooges flick!

    1. Gregory, thanks for your insights! They're adding another, more nuanced, layer of understanding.

      I don't understand Dranov's silence, considering his enormous "moral" AND professional failures here. He certainly could have, and STILL could, do "more". On two counts.

      Assuming MMcQ was very upset but described a non-sexual event: How could a physician, from within the community, NOT followup with MMcQ, Schultz, Raykovitz, other professionals in the community, to be absolutely certain that they weren't missing signs of a pedophile in their midst??

      Then later, when Paterno and PSU were hung for "not doing more": How could a physician, from within the community, NOT stand up and shout that MMcQ's account did NOT warrant further reporting or investigation???

      Dranov cannot have it both ways. Either he failed morally AND professionally in Feb 2001; or he is failing, at least morally, now by allowing Paterno and PSU to shoulder the blame for Sandusky's ability to abuse freely.

      Does anyone here have personal insight into Dranov and his actions/ inactions since 2001?? How does he go to the grocery store, pick up dry-cleaning, attend community events without having to explain HIS culpability in all this??? Is the local public contented by his supposed swear of silence to his lawyer and others??? I can't imagine this, not among the JoPa/ We Are Penn State community.

    2. Everyone is making good points here, but I have to wonder if anything after Sandusky's first documented child abuse from 1994-1997 is really of any consequence.
      I find it troubling that an abrupt and premature "changing of the guard" in the Attorney General's office occurred soon after the earliest Sandusky complaints began. Corbett was shoved in to replace Ernie Preate, mid-term, in 1995. Now according to the grand jury presentment, this is the height of law enforcement's awareness of the earliest Sandusky abuse of Second Mile boys. Corbett was the Attorney General then that had these complaints. Why did he not immediately act to arrest Sandusky? And can we assume, or is it documented, that when Corbett left the Attorney General's office in 1997, he left the complaints with his DA, Ray Gricar?
      So anything happening after Corbett's abandonment of duty to arrest a threat to children from 1995 through 1997 is a moot point. He basically would not do his job, and then dumped the task on his DA, Ray Gricar. And to further highlight Corbett's neglect of duty, he had two more FULL TERMS as Attorney General from 2004 to 2012 to eliminate the threat that Sandusky was to PSU!
      Sandusky's abuse of 3 of his Second Mile boys between 1994 and 1997 occurred in hotel rooms, not on the PSU campus. This is an issue for law enforcement, not PSU. This is clearly neglect of duty by the PA Attorney General. Any rapes, whether they occurred at PSU or not, after Corbett's first 3 year neglect of duty, is a result of that neglect of duty. PSU can not be held liable for being put in harm's way by a negligent law enforcement official.
      The ambiguous details of "slapping sounds", "who's in the shower or not", and "well I didn't know he was a pedophile" all happened way after the early years, and are all moot points when we establish that at the beginning, Tom Corbett knew what Sandusky was, and that he was a threat to children and his employer.
      I urge all the good people previously employed at PSU, currently employed at PSU, and Alumni, not to get bogged down with finger-pointing at each other. Band together and realize none of you are responsible for being put into harm's way beginning at the very early date of 1994. It would be like saying a resident bear in a campground that mauled people shouldn't have been able to get at the camper's trash, so it's the camper's fault. How so, if the ranger had knowledge of this bear and his previous aggressive habits towards earlier campers, and the ranger didn't act to remove the threat? How is it the later camper's fault for being left with a threat in their midst? We assume we are being protected by those that we hire to protect us.

    3. Truthseeker - One should also question whether the Attorney General in 1998 had any contact with Ray Gricar about the Sandusky investigation. That was Mike Fisher, who lost the 2002 Governor election and was appointed a federal judge by President Bush in 2003.

      Where is more information on "Sandusky's first documented child abuse from 1994-1997?"

    4. rdk - Dranov's testimony was in ways a defense of PSU but it received little media coverage and Freeh never even mentioned Dranov.

      His testimony contradicted what McQueary claimed he saw. Dranov said that all McQueary told him was seeing a boy peer around the shower wall, an arm pull the boy back and then Sandusky exit the shower a bit later.

      A fair judge would have dismissed the charges for victim 2 and told the prosecution to refile when they identified the victim. A rational jury would have acquitted on all the charges for victim 2 given the victim was unidentified and that Dranov contradicted McQueary.

    5. Fair judge? The one who allowed testimony from the janitor?
      Rational jury? The one who convicted JS on several counts of molesting a fictitious victim fabricated by Frank Fina, et al, for the purpose of inciting the media and poisoning the jury pool? The same fictitious victim that Louis Freeh cited as having endured the most horrific rape on the PSU campus because of the football culture?

      If Frank Fina was capable of fabricating this story and getting a man to commit perjury, think of how good he was in getting the "victims" to lie and embellish, especially with all the extra $$$ they could get from the good people at PSU. Believe me, I've dealt with inner city kids, and some of them are incredibly good liars to begin with....and when the cops tell you to lie all you want....WOW!

      Honestly, the Janitor story had all of the markings of a HOAX from the get-go. It had more holes than a deer crossing sign in Perry County! When did you ever hear of a member of a powerful public works union being afraid of being fired for anything, much less turning in a pedophile that no one seemed to like. And when did you ever hear a story like that not to make the break room gossip circuit and be all over State College in 3 days with an appropriate amount of embellishment and distortion? That dog didn't bark!

    6. That last paragraph was priceless.....more holes than a deer crossing sign in Perry County! That dog didn't bark!

      Great stuff!

    7. Tim, thanks for the review of Dranov's testimony. This only supports my inability to understand why Dranov is not shouting from the rooftops that this is NOT a Penn State/ Paterno/ football culture Scandal. And that all the efforts and dollars that have been put in to make it so are leaving PA young people at risk of sexual victimization.

      Dr. Dranov has moral AND professional responsibility to stop this PSU focus/ diversion!! Does anyone know if he's been doing anything on behalf of PA's kids... Shameful.

  5. Any ideas as to why Dick Thornburgh would be endorsing Tom Corbett for reelection? That has to be the most ludicrous thing I have ever heard of! Is Thornburgh a hypocrite or just too old to know what he's saying and doing anymore? Shame on you Mr. Thornburgh!

  6. Seems Delilah Rumburg whiffed on that Mother of All Teachable Moments, that National Conversation.

    Becasue the Worst Child Molester in US History was operating in plain sight on the Michigan State campus before, during and after the Sandusky Scandal blew open and rained down on Penn State.

    Here it is, January 2017, and not a peep from PCAR CEO Rumburg on the "medical rape camp" Michigan State's Dr. Larry Nassar was conducting in the athletic training facilities.

    In fact, Michigan State's Title IX office had a female student/athlete in there complaining of her sexual assault by Dr. Nassar, and with just this single victim (out of many) there is more evidence of the crime of rape than what Louis Freeh had in his 267 page report.

    Instead, Ms. Rumburg chose to take Penn State's money and look away.