Morgan: Was 2001 incident really uncovered by an anonymous e-mail tip?

The relationships between The Second Mile and then-AG Tom Corbett raise serious doubts about Chris Houser's e-mail being the "big break" that uncovered the 2001 incident.

By
Eileen Morgan

The most recent investigation of Jerry Sandusky’s alleged child abuse began in November 2008 which led to his arrest 3 years later in November 2011 and eventually ended with a conviction in June 2012.

Former AG Tom Corbett

Many have questioned why it took then-Attorney General Tom Corbett so long to make an arrest and take Sandusky off the streets.  It has been speculated that Corbett was dragging his feet and delaying the arrest for political reasons and because many affluent people connected to Sandusky’s non-profit foundation, the Second Mile, were financially supporting Corbett’s gubernatorial campaign in 2010. Corbett did not want the bad publicity that Sandusky’s arrest would bring to the Second Mile and possibly taint his run for governor.

After two years of going nowhere, Corbett’s team allegedly received the break they needed that blew this case wide open and resulted in Sandusky’s arrest in 2011.

The Big Break
We have been told that this ‘big break’ in the 2 year old probe just happened to come on November 3, 2010, one day after Corbett won the gubernatorial election.  

An anonymous e-mailer apparently claimed he learned about the Mike McQueary 2001 shower incident in an online chatroom and passed this information on to District Attorney Stacy Parks Miller.  Discovering this 2001 incident led the investigators to McQueary and eventually to Sandusky’s arrest.

As we recently learned, the anonymous tipster was a man named Chris Houser.  But was this Houser's email really the ‘big break’ Corbett and the OAG needed to make the case?  

Or, had the OAG known about the 2001 incident since early in the investigation? 

The Second Mile (TSM) Knew About Sandusky Investigation in 2008
When you review the timeline of information learned in this investigation, it is more likely that the 2001 incident was already known and the OAG simply sat on this information. 

Dr. Jack Raykovitz.
Second Mile Executive Director

According to this  PennLive, August 2012 article, ¹

"On Nov. 25, 2008, Jerry Sandusky told Second Mile Director Jack Raykovitz that he had been accused of something inappropriate by a Clinton County boy.  

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.’"

A November 15, 2011, PennLive article² stated: 

"Second Mile executive Katherine Genovese (wife of Jack Raykovitz) told a person in authority that the charity already had concerns about Sandusky and certain boys.  That conversation is said to have occurred in late 2008 around the same time that a Clinton County boy came forward with detailed allegations of sexual abuse. He became Victim One in the grand jury investigation."

And finally, this Huffington Post article³ claims that Gerald Rosamilia, the Director of Clinton County's child welfare agency (CYS) where the 2008 investigation began, said Raykovitz's wife told him in November 2008 that Sandusky had been spoken to about getting "too close" to children involved with the charity. Gerald Rosamilia said Raykovitz's wife, Katherine Genovese, who helped run The Second Mile, did not define what was meant by "too close" or give a timeframe.  Raykovitz defended himself in a telephone interview, saying he acted appropriately at all times. "There have always been steps in place to protect kids," he said.’

Sandusky scandal marked by deception, suppression, and manipulation (Part I)

In order to make the case against Sandusky and PSU football (but no one else), the Commonwealth and others suppressed and manipulated evidence

By
Ray Blehar

If things had gone according to the original plan in the Sandusky investigation, Jerry would be a free man, The Second Mile charity would be thriving, Joe Paterno would have retired as the winningest coach in Division I football, and life would have went on as it always did in Happy Valley.

Ironically, it was not Jerry Sandusky that changed life in Happy Valley as we know it, but rather, it was Governor Tom Corbett, whose political vendetta against Graham Spanier set everything in motion. 

The trail of evidence in this case will demonstrate how the actions of Corbett, Freeh, Erickson, the Patriot News, and others turned what should have been The Second Mile(TSM)/Department of Public Welfare (DPW)  scandal into what became known as the Penn State sex abuse scandal.   The evidence also indicates that activities occurring at PSU, TSM, and other places were not just a matter of coincidence.

By sensationalizing the 2001 incident at PSU, Corbett and his allies diverted the attention away from the people who enabled Sandusky’s access to children- DPW and The Second Mile - during his decades long period of abuse and shifted the blame on PSU's "football culture."

Each person or group was motivated by self-interest, which revolved around  just two things - money and power.

Some "Conspiracy of Silence" Charges Debunked Today

According to John Corro, PSU IT personnel provided e-mails to Baldwin in April and November 2011 - contradicting the narrative in the Conspiracy of Silence Presentment.

By
Ray Blehar


Obstruction of justice and criminal conspiracy charges stemming from  PSU's alleged lack of cooperation in turning over e-mails and the Schultz file took some serious hits today with the testimony of John Corro and Kimberly Belcher.

E-mails

Corro's testimony contradicted the version of events that was reported in the November 2012, Conspiracy of Silence grand jury presentment on page 38.  The charge stated:

• The total lack of compliance with the Grand Jury's requests for information, such as Subpoena 1179.

According to the presentment (page 20-23), PSU did not provide any documents or e-mails in response to Subpoena 1179, which was issued in December 2010.

The testimony of John Corro contradicted the Commonwealth's charge on page 23 that IT employees were never asked to fulfill requests for Sandusky related information.  According to OnwardState, Corro stated that they were asked and complied with requests for e-mail searches on Curley, Schultz, Spanier, and Paterno.  Corro stated that they had turned over e-mails to Baldwin in April 2011 and November 2011.

Spanier's letter to the Board of Trustees from July 2012 confirmed that the e-mail evidence was indeed collected by PSU and turned over at his grand jury appearance in April 2011.

The Schultz file 

Given my previous blogging on the Schultz file, I was keenly interested to find out how Kimberly Belcher would testify about its provision to Gary Schultz, the OAG, and the Freeh Group.

A Patriot News article by Jeff Franz reported that Belcher, by her own volition, gathered up the files and delivered the originals to Schultz.  She then was going to tell the Freeh group about the file in January, but balked when a University lawyer was present.  She eventually turned the file over after being subpoenaed in April.

The OnwardState article by Jess Tully reported a similar version, except that the OS version implied that Belcher told the Freeh group about the file in January 2012 and that she was subpoenaed in April 2012, but the article was not definitive on the hand over of the file.

UPDATE  8/2/2013:  Transcripts reveal that Belcher stated Schultz turned the file over to the Office of Attorney General one day prior to her turning it over.  Both reporters missed this not so small fact?

Regardless of when the delivery of the files happened, the key takeaway of each account is that in neither case did Schultz request the file from Belcher, who delivered it to Schultz as part of things she thought he should have.  Also, Belcher testified that Schultz told her to cooperate with the investigation if asked.

Also, it is notable that Schultz testified about the existence of the file in January 2011 at his grand jury appearance, but was not working at PSU at the time and thought it might have been destroyed.  Schultz did not hide the file in any way, shape, or form.

Between the testimony of Belcher and Schultz, there is no basis for the charge (page 38) that:

• Schultz hid the existence of pertinent files and notes.

My previous blogs on the Schultz file and the antics of Cynthia Baldwin also provide the evidence that the charge of Curley and Spanier hiding the existence of files is also baseless.

Conclusions

Today was the prosecutor's ball game and the testimony of Belcher and Corro didn't help the prosecution's cause.

While McQueary made the biggest news of the day with his revelation about Paterno talking to him about the 2001 incident every so often through the years, reports vary on what was actually said and it's best to wait to see the transcripts.