Former Penn State President Graham Spanier has been charged with several counts

[J. J. in Phila]

But he didn't know Sandusky was sexually abusing boys, that's the mantra he keeps repeating in his interviews. What he doesn't say: by having Tim Curley investigate the allegation, he was certain to never know Sandusky was sexually abusing children.

It's infuriating. I agree with nittanylioness that he would have been better served to keep a low profile.

He didn't know, but he suspected.

 

[Morag]

He didn't know, but he suspected.

He would have us believe that he heard about a man in his mid-50s, naked, in the showers with a naked child, at night, who was 'horsing around'. Spanier, the person who knows more than anyone (per himself) about child abuse, never even thought that the horsing around was sexual in nature.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

He would have us believe that he heard about a man in his mid-50s, naked, in the showers with a naked child, at night, who was 'horsing around'. Spanier, the person who knows more than anyone (per himself) about child abuse, never even thought that the horsing around was sexual in nature.

If Spanier is agreeing to call DPW, as he did, he had to realize that some type of abuse could have happened.

 

[BigCat]

Former PSU head Spanier was leading researcher on sex, family issues

http://articles.philly.com/2012-08-23/news/33343430_1_sociology-researcher-administrators

As a young researcher, the man who would rise to president of Pennsylvania State University and then fall from grace over his handling of the Jerry Sandusky affair used his academic skills to investigate two of the emerging sociological issues of the era: the sexual revolution and the changing American family.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I am wondering if Spanier was a mandatory reporter under PA law? McQueary and Paterno were not.

 

[Rlaub44]

I am wondering if Spanier was a mandatory reporter under PA law? McQueary and Paterno were not.

At the time, I believe the wording of the law still mentioned that the child had to come before them in their professional capacity.

Although as I think about it, as the head of the institution, once a report was made to him, he probably was mandated to report, even if the people under him were not mandatory reporters.

 

[Julien]

From the following...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/24/graham-spanier-penn-state-s-next-indictment.html

“I was kind of like a drowning man trying to clutch onto a log or some kind of life preserver,” McLaughlin remembers of the day he finally called the president’s office at PSU. “To think of how many children had been abused since me! I was in full panic mode when I called Spanier.” As he was getting the brushoff, McLaughlin said, he offered to send Spanier the professor’s taped confession so he could hear for himself the man admitting to past abuse. McLaughlin said he was dismissively told, “Don’t bother,” before Spanier hung up.

“My opinion is that Spanier was more concerned with how my report would reflect on him rather than discovering and removing a serious threat to children,” McLaughlin concluded.

In 2005, after another victim came forward to buttress McLaughlin’s claims, the professor and two other men were indicted on multiple counts of child sexual abuse in Maryland. The case was also featured on the television program America’s Most Wanted twice. Ultimately the charges against the professor were dismissed. That professor, who is still employed by Penn State, has denied the allegations.

It would be interesting to know when in 2005 the other victim came forward.

As this story has unfolded, I have wondered if there was any connection with NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Love Association) in all of this. Sure enough...

A featured speaker at the Sex Faire was Patrick Califia-Rice, a transgender man who has advocated sex between adults and children on the website of the pedophile-advocacy group NAMBLA (the National American Man-Boy Love Association).

At the Feb. 28, 2001, committee hearing, Spanier was asked directly if he thought the Sex Faire was wrong or immoral. The PSU president apologized for certain parts of the event, but maintained that the university was committed to what he termed “free speech.” He added in pure Clintonesque style, “It depends on what your definition of immoral is.”

Some pertinent background information...

A highly controversial paper was published by the American Psychological Association in the July 1998 edition of the Psychological Bulletin entitled A Meta-Analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples. This led to what is now known as the Rind et al. Controversy:

http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/rind/cont.html

One of the authors, Philip Tromovitch, was a doctoral student at the University of Pennsylvania at the time. He, along with Bruce Rind (a professor at Temple University), also published a literature review in The Journal of Sex Research in 1997. The 1998 paper caught the attention of and was used by advocates for pedophilia, including NAMBLA. Rind and Bauserman (the third author of the 1998 paper) had also published articles in Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia, that promoted the "normalization of pedophilia".

Given Spanier's educational background and research interests, it is highly likely that he was aware of these papers.

 

[BigCat]

I am wondering if Spanier was a mandatory reporter under PA law? McQueary and Paterno were not.

He must have been obligated to report an allegation against a professor emeritus whom he appointed.

I think he's trying to get out in front of an indictment. That's the only reason I can think of for him to be "going on the offensive." All these scripted, legally-correct answers are certainly not helping him in the PR department. There must be some other motivation.

JMO

 

[J. J. in Phila]

He must have been obligated to report an allegation against a professor emeritus whom he appointed.

Why? That might be the reason he wasn't charged. As for perjury, we don't have his grand jury testimony.

I think he's trying to get out in front of an indictment. That's the only reason I can think of for him to be "going on the offensive." All these scripted, legally-correct answers are certainly not helping him in the PR department. There must be some other motivation.

He might think it does, or if he stays silent, he'll look even more guilty.

I also cannot figure out why his tenure has not been removed for "moral turpitude."

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Here is the reporting requirements:

A person who, in the course of
employment, occupation or practice of a profession, comes into
contact with children shall report or cause a report to be made
in accordance with section 6313 (relating to reporting
procedure) when the person has reasonable cause to suspect, on
the basis of medical, professional or other training and
experience, that a child under the care, supervision, guidance
or training of that person or of an agency, institution,
organization or other entity with which that person is
affiliated is a victim of child abuse, including child abuse by
an individual who is not a perpetrator.

http://law.onecle.com/pennsylvania/domestic-relations/00.063.011.000.html

Spainer doesn't actually come into contact with minors, in theory.

 

[BigCat]

Why? That might be the reason he wasn't charged. As for perjury, we don't have his grand jury testimony.

**Respectfully Shortened**

I don't think either Spanier or Raykovitz were required to report a man "horsing around" with a child. Curley and Schultz let both men off the hook.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I don't think either Spanier or Raykovitz were required to report a man "horsing around" with a child. Curley and Schultz let both men off the hook.

Spanier knew that it was serious enough to call in DPW, because he agreed to it.

Raykovitz is a bit different. Despite a legal requirement that DPW inform TSM, and come up with a temporary plan, Lauro never did. Raykovitz had no idea 1998/Victim 6 happened until he read it in the paper.

Raykovitz was also not part of the PSU decision making process in 2001. He only had a limited third hand account. He didn't even know that they were considering calling in DPW in 2001. Curley only talked to Raykovitz after they decided not to inform DPW.

 

[Reader]

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/08/spanier_says_it_was_his_choice.html

Graham Spanier, the former president of embattled Penn State University, says the former board of trustees chair and vice chair didn't want him to resign, but that he felt it was best to step aside to help the university move through the Jerry Sandusky crisis..........

[Spanier denies other things the board has said...I read somewhere before that he was given a choice of being fired or resigning....]

Spanier, however, said he wants to talk.........

•Spanier said his national security clearances go back to 1995 for his various consulting work, but he is currently not doing any consulting work for the federal government. He declined to say who he has consulted.
•The “one good thing” Spanier saw in the Freeh report were several recommendations that he believes will make the university more secure from predators like Sandusky.
•Spanier defended his management style, which Erickson has said was not as inclusive as it should have been. Spanier also denied there was ever a culture of silence at Penn State.

 

[Rlaub44]

Spanier knew that it was serious enough to call in DPW, because he agreed to it.

Raykovitz is a bit different. Despite a legal requirement that DPW inform TSM, and come up with a temporary plan, Lauro never did. Raykovitz had no idea 1998/Victim 6 happened until he read it in the paper.

Raykovitz was also not part of the PSU decision making process in 2001. He only had a limited third hand account. He didn't even know that they were considering calling in DPW in 2001. Curley only talked to Raykovitz after they decided not to inform DPW.

Well, remember that people thought PSU officials should have done more in 1998 even after Sandusky was cleared - do we really think Raykovitz didn't get enough info from Curley that he should have investigated it at all? As a psychologist, and the CEO of a children's agency, I feel he had some obligation to find out if there was more to what Curley said; in that field, even the appearance of impropriety can ruin an organization.

When I link that with the report from Sara Ganim that Ms. Genovese allegedly told the C&Y director from Clinton County that they had to tell Jerry to back off of certain kids in the past, I'm not so quick to give Raykovitz a pass.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Well, remember that people thought PSU officials should have done more in 1998 even after Sandusky was cleared - do we really think Raykovitz didn't get enough info from Curley that he should have investigated it at all? As a psychologist, and the CEO of a children's agency, I feel he had some obligation to find out if there was more to what Curley said; in that field, even the appearance of impropriety can ruin an organization.

When I link that with the report from Sara Ganim that Ms. Genovese allegedly told the C&Y director from Clinton County that they had to tell Jerry to back off of certain kids in the past, I'm not so quick to give Raykovitz a pass.

Raykovitz seemed, at least, shocked in his e-mail after he read it.

 

[Reader]

Well, remember that people thought PSU officials should have done more in 1998 even after Sandusky was cleared - do we really think Raykovitz didn't get enough info from Curley that he should have investigated it at all? As a psychologist, and the CEO of a children's agency, I feel he had some obligation to find out if there was more to what Curley said; in that field, even the appearance of impropriety can ruin an organization.

When I link that with the report from Sara Ganim that Ms. Genovese allegedly told the C&Y director from Clinton County that they had to tell Jerry to back off of certain kids in the past, I'm not so quick to give Raykovithe a pass.

There is a big difference in JS not getting charged with a crime, after the investigation was mishandled, and the school taking action to protect minor children in their own facilities and themselves from liability. There are many cases every day that are not charged but a school or agency continues to work with the family, alleged abuser and children.

Although it seems Sheffler tried his best and he thought charges should have been made there is something VERY strange:

about Seasock being brought in to do an evaluation when he had all the close ties with CPS and SM and was not qualified,

about why/who at DPW wanted Seasock brought into the case after K. Arnold told Scheffler to hold off on a 2nd opinion,

about Arnold then being taken off the case by Gricar,

about Lauro not getting Chambers' report/you would think that in discussing the case Scheffler would have mentioned it and I have a feeling this is Lauro CYA,

about Lauro just dropping the entire case and not working, or assigning someone else to work, with JS and the children in a follow up on his behavior,

about DPW not doing the required follow up plan with SM,

about Gricar possibly not seeing/reading the Chambers' report/I've read this several places, even though it was supposed to be attached to the police report,

about Gricar taking only Lauro's opinion on there 'being no child abuse' over the Chambers report if he did read it and the police investigator's recommendation for charges,

about PSU not giving SM a heads up on JS's activities after hours in their facilities with SM children....why wouldn't they want the CEO involved?

The entire situation and how it was handled is just very strange to me and shows inadequate communication among the parties involved so ALL information was shared to come to a decision.

It just makes me think someone's hand was involved behind or within the scenes to influence the case.......

 

[nittanylioness234]

Thanks, Reader, for a good synopsis of the outstanding questions. I would add my favorite: what is in the missing pages (23 and 24) of the 1998 police report? How did it go from, "Investigation to continue" to "Case closed?"

 

[Julien]

Raykovitz most definitely doesn't get a pass from me! In a former life I practiced as a clinical psychologist and I was shocked when I learned about Raykovitz' role as a psychologist in this cast of characters... and then even more so when the news broke about Matt Sandusky. This was before I had started to really look into this mess. According to his biological mother, Debra Long, Matt even saw Raykovitz for some of his counseling after his suicide attempt. This is one of the biggest cluster!@#$s of boundary violations I have ever seen! The INSTANT that I read about Matt starting a fire in the barn... I started to question whether or not he'd been abused... and even more so after reading further about his history, how he came to live with Sandusky, etc., etc.. I cannot imagine that, given Raykovitz' training and working with at-risk youth, he didn't have some of the same thoughts run through his mind! And that's just about Matt... now consider the 1998 and 2001 incidents.

This raises so many questions... Why did Sandusky pick Raykovitz to head up TSM? Raykovitz received his PhD from PSU in 1983... the same year he was hired at TSM. Why pick someone THAT green and pay them such a large salary given his credentials? I've seen his LinkedIn account... why is he not listing TSM as part of his Experience? He's listing Scenery Park Psychology Group from 1996-Present, although his Company Website link leads right back to TSM. And his Contact Jack for:... he's only selected getting back in touch. Ironic, no?!

How many kids did he evaluate &/or conduct therapy with while at TSM? Could he have influenced any of them regarding Sandusky? Just how incestuous WAS the relationship between JS, PSU, TSM, JR, CYS, DPW, etc... and THE CHILDREN THAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BE PROTECTING?

As horrifying as it is, I have even wondered if there may be some second-generation Sandusky victims involved... meaning that some of the kids that he abused have grown up and are now supporting him. There is such a thing as trauma-bonding whereby the victim develops a deep attachment for their abuser. Perhaps the most notable of this was exhibited by some Mengele's twin survivors who developed a great affection for him!

One more thing...

I located the address for Scenery Park Psychology Group and googled that address. You might want to try this... and pay attention to the list of names/businesses that show up at the same address in a different suite. They will be listed on the left hand side when you click on the Google map.

Yet another coincidence?

 

[Rlaub44]

Raykovitz most definitely doesn't get a pass from me! In a former life I practiced as a clinical psychologist and I was shocked when I learned about Raykovitz' role as a psychologist in this cast of characters... and then even more so when the news broke about Matt Sandusky. This was before I had started to really look into this mess. According to his biological mother, Debra Long, Matt even saw Raykovitz for some of his counseling after his suicide attempt. This is one of the biggest cluster!@#$s of boundary violations I have ever seen! The INSTANT that I read about Matt starting a fire in the barn... I started to question whether or not he'd been abused... and even more so after reading further about his history, how he came to live with Sandusky, etc., etc.. I cannot imagine that, given Raykovitz' training and working with at-risk youth, he didn't have some of the same thoughts run through his mind! And that's just about Matt... now consider the 1998 and 2001 incidents.

This raises so many questions... Why did Sandusky pick Raykovitz to head up TSM? Raykovitz received his PhD from PSU in 1983... the same year he was hired at TSM. Why pick someone THAT green and pay them such a large salary given his credentials? I've seen his LinkedIn account... why is he not listing TSM as part of his Experience? He's listing Scenery Park Psychology Group from 1996-Present, although his Company Website link leads right back to TSM. And his Contact Jack for:... he's only selected getting back in touch. Ironic, no?!

How many kids did he evaluate &/or conduct therapy with while at TSM? Could he have influenced any of them regarding Sandusky? Just how incestuous WAS the relationship between JS, PSU, TSM, JR, CYS, DPW, etc... and THE CHILDREN THAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BE PROTECTING?

As horrifying as it is, I have even wondered if there may be some second-generation Sandusky victims involved... meaning that some of the kids that he abused have grown up and are now supporting him. There is such a thing as trauma-bonding whereby the victim develops a deep attachment for their abuser. Perhaps the most notable of this was exhibited by some Mengele's twin survivors who developed a great affection for him!

One more thing...

I located the address for Scenery Park Psychology Group and googled that address. You might want to try this... and pay attention to the list of names/businesses that show up at the same address in a different suite. They will be listed on the left hand side when you click on the Google map.

Yet another coincidence?

Hm, an attorney's name jumps out at me right away.

Your points about Raykovitz are on the money. If anyone was trained and duty-bound to recognize Sandusky's inappropriate behaviors and clinginess as red flags, and then put two & two together after hearing from Curley, it should have been the good doctor. I would love to know if TSM had ever received other complaints from parents or agencies; although with their missing records, we will probably never know for certain.

Off-topic; Did you practice in the State College area by chance?

 

[Julien]

Hm, an attorney's name jumps out at me right away.

Yep.

I would love to know if TSM had ever received other complaints from parents or agencies; although with their missing records, we will probably never know for certain.

How convenient, huh?

Off-topic; Did you practice in the State College area by chance?

Nope... no where in PA. LOL... it would have saved me a LOT of research time if I had practiced in PA because I would already be familiar with the system.