61 online
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 44 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds    H3'ed 7/19/12

1998: So Close to an End for Sandusky - Who Interfered and Why?

By       (Page 1 of 2 pages)   5 comments
Follow Me on Twitter     Message Barry Bozeman

A SMOKING GUN IN THE FREEH REPORT that focuses on the real reason Sandusky was not discovered in 1998? This information comes directly from the Freeh Report and a little research. Freeh's investigators got some good information - but did they fail to connect the dots and follow the trail? This is what I discovered - you will have to determine it's value and impact. I hope it is not divisive since it has little to do with the actions or inaction of Joe, Tim or Gary in 2001 and only involves what could have been known in 1998 but slipped away due to a colossal mistake or a hidden hand.

Brief Summary: In 1998 CYS is replaced by DPW in the Victim 6 investigation and in the process A.Chambers damning psychological evaluation is hidden from DPW investigator Lauro. Instead a CYS counselor who worked with The Second Mile gives a "pedophile free" evaluation over the objection of DA Arnold to Lauro who advises Gricar to close the case. Sandusky goes undiscovered. Sounds downright Machiavellian but the Freeh Report reveals that's what happened. Ironic isn't it? Freeh could have actually cleared Joe and PSU and discovered the real reason that Sandusky was not found out in 1998? 

Why did the 98 investigation get side tracked? Who caused it? Or was it just a terrible mistake? This is a serious question that should be investigated by someone not influenced by PA politicians. Someone at the State level had to OK the hand-off from CYS to DPW and knew about the Chambers report that could have ended this whole affair before it cost Joe and PSU so much. The Seasock report is what left Sandusky in place at PSU and The Second Mile but only PSU, Joe, Tim, Gary and Spanier got burned because of it. From the Freeh Report Page 43

Detective Schreffler contacted John Miller, a caseworker with Centre County Children & Youth Services (CYS) about the allegation. However, there were several conflicts of interest with CYS's involvement in the case. CYS had contracts with the Second Mile - including placement of children in 2M residential program & the Second Mile CEO Raykovitz had a contract with CYS to conduct evaluations. The referral sheet from psychologist Chambers indicated the case might involve a CYS foster child. In light of these conflicts, the Dept of Public Welfare (DPW) took over the case on May 5. DPW officials in Harrisburg, PA took the lead because of Sandusky's high profile and assigned it to caseworker Jerry Lauro replacing John Miller.

So the CYS John Miller who knew about Psychologist Alycia Chambers report was replaced because of a "conflict" with The Second Mile. Since Second Mile CEO Raykovitz had a contract with CYS to do evaluations someone there could easily have tipped him or someone in the Attorney General's office off about Chambers Sandusky damning evaluation and the stink it would raise about The Second Mile. Corbett was an early member of the 2M Board along with several other prominent political figures. Would they find it "inconvenient" if this shining star in the 1000 Points of Light was dimmed by this report? Would it launch an investigation that might reflect badly on them and the cash cow that was beginning to generate some significant income and assets while funneling money to certain candidates for high office?

May 4-6, Police Report, Initial Investigation and Psychological Evaluation

On May 4, Victim 6's mother called Alycia Chambers, a licensed psychologist who had been working with her son, to see if she was overreacting to Sandusky's showering with her son. The boy told Schrefï "er what happened with Sandusky the previous evening, and added that a 10-year-old friend of his had been in a shower with Jerryon another occasion where Sandusky similarly squeezed the friend. Chambers made a report to the PA child abuse line and consulted with colleagues. Her colleagues agreed that the incidents meet all of our definitions, based on experience and education, of a likely pedophile's pattern of building trust and gradual introduction of physical touch, within a context of a "loving, special relationship

Wow -note that Chambers uncovered a second victim of a Sandusky shower right then who is never mentioned again. if only Jerry Lauro had known of Chambers evaluation? What would he have done then? Freeh Report Page 43

On May 7, Chambers provided a copy of her written report to Det. Schretfler. Chambers said she was pleased with the response ot the agencies involved, as the gravity of the incidents seems to be well appreciated. Also on May 7, Lauro interviewed the boy's mother. According to Schreffler's notes, Lauro had received copies of the boy's recorded statement, yet Lauro advised the Special Investigative Counsel that he did not have full access to the facts of the case and was unaware of psychologist Chambers' evaluation. Lauro said that if he "had seen Chambers report, I would not have stopped the investigation", which he thought at the time fell into a "gray" area and involved possible "boundary issues" Schreffler had a discussion with AD Arnold that day as well.Arnold told Schreffer to postpone a second psychological evaluation of the boy until an additional investigation could be completed. Nonetheless, a second evaluation of the boy occurred on May 8, as part of DPW's investigation.

Obviously Lauro would have continued to investigate and certainly he would not have concluded "no criminal behavior"

CYS is a Centre County Organization but DPW Dept. of Public Welfare is state. If someone on the State level wanted to quash a damning psychological examination what would they do and why? Who could cause this take over and why? Or was it just particularly sloppy work by a confused system of conflicting agencies. People don't give Joe Tim or Gary a break for not reporting to these agencies but given this track record would it have made a difference? This mistake was made in error or with help from a guiding hand. Seems like it would be a good idea to find out which does it not?

The 1998 situation was so very close to getting to the truth of Jerry Sandusky - if Lauro or Gricar had known of Chambers evaluation and the 2nd "victim" it would have all ended right there but somebody stepped in and because of "conflicts" put the State's DPW in charge keeping Chambers report a secret. It certainly wasn't Paterno or PSU administrators - it had to be someone connected to The Second Mile and the state government. In the final result the conclusions of Jerry Lauro - "there was no criminal behavior" and Seasock - "no pedophile tendencies" were the result of not knowing what Psychologist Chambers had found and that led to a situation where a Head Coach, Athletic Director, and VP for Finance could only be aware that Sandusky was investigated and cleared leading them with good reason to believe his showering with boys was nothing much to be concerned about. Had they known of Chambers and her colleagues opinions it could have made a significant difference. So who changed the agencies and how was that report kept from Lauro? Who gave Seasock the go ahead that led to his "pedophile free:" evaluation?

Tom Ridge was the Gov at the time and someone with a knowledge of PA politics will have to get into any connection to The Second Mile or the BOT at PSU. Mike Fisher was then Attorney General and he was preceded by Tom Corbett now Gov. Both Ridge and Fisher were appointed to Federal office by George W Bush. Wonder if there was any relationship to The Second Mile here like there is with Corbett? From th Milton Hershey Protect the Children

Mike Fisher served as AG from 1997 to 2004. One of AG Fisher's inappropriate activities he failed to investigate and prosecute pedophile Charles Koons even though his molestation of an MHS student had been reported to authorities in the late 1980s. Fisher further exacerbated dysfunction at MHS by his failure to replace self-serving Trust Board members with child care experts. Instead he continued the tenure of some Board members who were part of the problem and appointed non-child care experts to replace those removed from the Board. IS FISHER THE PROBLEM? 
Mike Fisher was also the Attorney General when the inappropriate behavior of Jerry Sandusky, State College, PA pedophile, was first reported by the victim's mother to PSU police in May 1998. The complaint was referred to Ray Gricar, DA of Centre County, PA. Gricar initially assigned the case to Assistant DA Karen Arnold. Gricar took the case from Arnold after two or three days, saying he was going to handle it personally. No charges were filed by Gricar or Fisher against Sandusky. Ron Schreffler, PSU police investigator, helped produce a report about the 1998 Sandusky incident that was referred to Gricar. That report, although highly sought after, is missing.

Hold the presses - Is the real reason for the Attorney General going after Paterno and PSU coming into focus? Who better than a deceased icon to distract attention away from some very powerful politicians with every reason to want the world to focus on anything else but their interference in 1998. Mike Fisher and the Board for the Second Mile are part of a group that secured over $200,000 for the Corbett Campaign while Corbett was supposedly investigating Sandusky. Why did the Chambers psych evaluation never make it from CYS to Jerry Lauro and DPW? Was someone protecting Sandusky and the Second Mile?

More from the Freeh Report p 42

" Schreffler had a discussion with Karen Arnold, Centre County prosecutor in the District Attorney's office, that day as well. Arnold told Schreffer to postpone a second psychological evaluation of the boy until an additional investigation could be completed. Nonetheless, a second evaluation of the boy occurred on May 8, as part of DPW's investigation. Counselor John Seasock,opined that "there seems to be no incident which could be termed as sexual abuse, nor did there appear to be any sequential pattern of logic and behavior which is usually consistent with adults who have difficulty with sexual abuse of children." Seasock's report ruled out that the boy "had been placed in a situation where he was being "groomed for future sexual victimization.*

Why did CYS evaluator Seasock go ahead with this evaluation when DA Arnold instructed it not be done? What additional investigation was Arnold having done? Did that stop when Gricar took over? It seems strange that DPW would use a CYS Evaluator after deciding that CYS had a conflict of interest with The Second Mile. Does someone from the state or The Second Mile want to have Seasock's report instead of Chambers go to Lauro at DPW? Is that why Arnold's directive was ignored? Who could arrange that and go over DA Arnold's head?

Next Page  1  |  2

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

Interesting 1  
Rate It | View Ratings

Barry Bozeman Social Media Pages: Facebook Page       Twitter Page       Linked In Page       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Graduate of the Univ of TN in Public Administration, owner of Mountain Sound Inc and Seismic Systems. Longtime blogger on politics, genealogy, loudspeaker manufacture, and Tennessee.

Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Follow Me on Twitter     Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

PSU and Paterno Not Guilty - McQueary Testimony Proves It.

1998: So Close to an End for Sandusky - Who Interfered and Why?

Did Freeh Frame Joe Paterno?

Penn State Paterno/ Sandusky Story; One Year Anniversary - We Now Know the Truth

Each 'Key Finding" of the Freeh Report is A Misleading Deception

So You Think Joe Paterno is a Liar?

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend