The Incident

‌ the full story of the 2016 Conestoga football scandal.

Be sure to read related blog posts for some surprising new insights.

The Incident

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

1

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

The Incident: Table of Contents 2015 Chapter 1: Chapter 2: Chapter 3: Chapter 4: Chapter 5:

A cyber-bullying scandal precedes an even bigger scandal.

Trouble at school. Problems at home.

The football coach takes on a huge liability. He just doesn’t know it.

Public statements about the cyber-bullying case.

Residency becomes an issue.

2016 Chapter 6: This is war.

Chapter 7: An allegation of sexual assault in the football team locker room.

Chapter 8: The investigation begins.

Chapter 9: There’s been a leak.

Chapter 10: Headwinds.

Chapter 11: Please say there was a vetting process.

Chapter 12: Mr. Hogan goes on TV. Chapter 13: The charges.

Chapter 14: The first thing we do, let’s kill all the … coaches.

Chapter 15: Mr. Hogan goes to Harrisburg.

Chapter 16: One not-so-small problem.

Chapter 17: Bits of conflicting evidence appear in the public domain.

Chapter 18: Mr. Hogan’s folly.

Chapter 19: Meanwhile … back to the non-residency matter.

Chapter 20: Big talk.

Chapter 21: Making it a federal case.

2017 Chapter 22: Chapter 23: Chapter 24: Chapter 25: Chapter 26: Chapter 27: Chapter 28:

Mr. Hogan’s case falls apart.

Joint Statement by Mr. Hogan and the defense attorneys.

Press gives the side-eye.

More seals. More secrets.

The coaches are excused.

The civil suit ends.

Mr. Hogan gets the last word … or does he?

Epilogue Bibliography

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

2

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

2015

Chapter 1: A cyber-bullying scandal precedes an even bigger scandal.

In April 2015, Tredyffrin Township police launched an investigation into alleged cyber-bullying activity at T/E Middle School in Berwyn, Pennsylvania.102. Some students were caught creating and then sharing “sexually explicit images” involving classmates.102. Not many people knew about the investigation at first. In total, four students would be charged and arrested in the months that followed.103. Eventually, the sordid details would be revealed.

This was the opening salvo in a shocking sequence of events that rocked the quiet suburban town of Berwyn. In the spring of 2015, the people of Berwyn were blissfully unaware that their little town would soon find itself at the center of a very public scandal.

One of the students who was involved in the cyber-bullying matter, we’ll call him “the Student”, is about to take center stage in our story. The Student, who stood accused in one alleged crime, would soon become the accuser in another.315.

From this point forward, please consider the following: This is largely a story about children being children, until they became victims. The Student is one of the central characters in the 2016 Conestoga football scandal, and he is referenced often here. But he is certainly not responsible for everything that happened. The Student was a child and maybe a pawn. Please keep an open heart for him and all of the children involved.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

3

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

Chapter 2: Trouble at school. Problems at home.

In September 2015, the Student began attending Conestoga High School as a freshman.

Presumably, the cyber-bullying investigation was still open, and the T/E School District was considering disciplinary action. Unfortunately, the cyber-bullying behavior would continue into the fall.101.

According to reports, the Student’s trouble at school led to problems at home. I have decided not to recount the reported details of the Student’s home life here. The full story can be found in the bibliography referenced below.

Chapter 3: The football coach takes on a huge liability. He just doesn’t know it.

In August 2015, the Student tried out for the Conestoga varsity football team. What happened next is pretty shocking. The head football coach acted in good faith, unaware of the danger that lay ahead. … like a lamb to the slaughter. Maybe he’ll tell the whole story when time permits. … some other day, some other blog.

Chapter 4: Public statements about the cyber-bullying case.

The charges in the cyber-bullying case were announced by Chester County District Attorney Thomas P. Hogan at a November 12th press conference.101. Here is the best available description of the charges: 11/17/2015 DailyLocal.com101. Police say that the students are facing felonies including criminal use of a communications facility and unlawful contact with a minor. Others charges include harassment, indecent assault and stalking related to the incident.

I have decided not to print the sordid details of the cyber-bullying activity here. The full story can be found in the bibliography referenced below.

However, for the purpose of this blog, the reader should note two points:

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

4

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

1. The cyber-bullying matter was serious. Mr. Hogan seemed angry; and for good reason. In fact, this case may have fueled his zeal for prosecuting the case that would come next.

It is fair to note, though, that Mr. Hogan did speak with a certain flair for the dramatic. In his press statements, he described the crime as a novelist would. (Example: “He [Hogan] called the matter ‘a case of bullying and broken hearts in the cyber age’.”101.) Mr. Hogan gave a perspective from inside the victim’s head and heart. (Example: “‘They isolated her, they made fun of her, they did everything to make her life hell on earth,’ Hogan explained.” 103.)

Mr. Hogan also gave a lot of graphic information about the actions of the victim and the accused. This is not what one would expect from a law enforcement official in a public statement involving minor children. Such disclosure seemed unnecessarily salacious - even careless – and could easily have drawn the attention of predators and voyeurs.

Oversharing is a choice we would see Mr. Hogan make again very soon.

2. Apparently, the victim in the cyber-bullying case sought protection under the newly enacted Protection from Sexual Violence and Intimidation Act (PSVI) in Pennsylvania.101. This was a recent July 2015 revision to the existing Protection from Abuse (PFA) Act. 901 The new Act allowed parents to seek protection for their minor children, and it covered a wider range of alleged abuse. 901 Mr. Hogan spoke about the new law and showcased its merits.101. In doing so, he may have considered himself a capable steward and an ally of the PA State Legislature. Mr. Hogan would win their allegiance again very soon when another new law needed a push.

Chapter 5: Residency becomes an issue.

10th 2015,

On November in response to the cyber-bullying charges, the parties agreed that the Student would leave Conestoga.501. District officials also agreed to pay the Student’s tuition at an alternative private school. 501 Of course, such an agreement would only be valid if the Student was a resident of the District.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

5

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

Soon after the agreement was reached, District officials began to question the residency status of the Student, believing he might no longer live in the T/E School District.501. District officials hired a private detective to investigate. 501.

In January 2016, the private detective informed District officials that the Student had not resided in the T/E School District since March 2015 - almost a full year. 502.

The full story can be found in the bibliography referenced below.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

6

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

2016

Chapter 6: This is war.

A change in the Student’s residency status would be a violation of the agreement that had been reached by the parties when the Student left Conestoga. Consequently, District officials demanded reimbursement of the Student’s tuition expense in the amount of $13,442.92. 502.

This amount represented the accumulated per diem charge for days attended in the T/E School District while not a resident plus tuition for the days attended at the alternative private school.502.

According to reports502., the rhetoric used by the District was bold: accusations of theft and lying, the potential for criminal prosecution, fines and imprisonment … all of it tied to a demand for repayment of $13,443.

This ignited a legal battle between the District and the Student’s family.

Chapter 7: An allegation of sexual assault in the football team locker room.

Soon after the District’s demand for repayment was initiated, the Student made a bombshell allegation.

The Student’s family notified District officials that the Student had been the victim of a sexual assault in the Conestoga football team locker room. 502. Details would be provided by Mr. Hogan later (see below “Mr. Hogan goes on TV” for source material.) The Student accused three football players, all seniors under the age of eighteen. The Student alleged that he was

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

7

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

sodomized with a broomstick when he refused to help sweep the locker room. Apparently, he alleged that the incident occurred before practice on Thursday October 15th 2015, three months earlier.

In addition, on February 17th 2016, the Student and his family sued the T/E School District to halt collection of the $13,443 tuition expense. 502. A hearing in the matter was scheduled for March 4th. 502. Under the circumstances, the T/E School District suspended its collection effort temporarily.502.

Chapter 8: The investigation begins.

Tredyffrin Township police and Chester County detectives launched an investigation into the alleged sexual assault in the Conestoga football team locker room. The head football coach was immediately suspended from his coaching positions, pending the completion of the investigation.

Some number of people were questioned. The exact number varies according to reports.

Presumably, all of the coaches were questioned. It is unclear whether all of the team members were questioned. Apparently, some of the teenage team members may have been questioned without their parents present. 505.

According to reports, some of the interrogators came down hard. They were said to be extremely aggressive.505. One wonders why that was necessary (especially since we now know they can’t have had compelling evidence of a sexual assault that didn’t happen). One source close to the situation even implied that the players were threatened by some of the interrogators, perhaps as a way to get them to admit something.505.

Ironically, it was Mr. Hogan himself who would soon proclaim in his March 4th televised press conference: 03/04/2016 wgal.com204. “… what we’re really talking about here is bigger stronger kids picking on smaller weaker kids. This is just bullying. And in Chester County we won’t stand for bullying.”

People familiar with the harsh interrogations saw this as a jaw-dropping moment of hypocrisy.

It is reasonable to wonder how children would react under these circumstances. They were probably novices when it came to crime and punishment. Surely, they were nervous and scared. Were they pressured by investigators? Were they exploited? We will never know

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

8

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

exactly what the players really said or what they meant to say and how it was all retold by Mr. Hogan, especially if their parents weren’t present. The records are sealed and secret.

Chapter 9: There’s been a leak.

5th,

As of February there had been no known public statement or press release by the Tredyffrin police or the Chester County detectives.201. But at least one local news outlet seemed to know quite a lot about the investigation which would later be sealed tight. Someone was talking.

02/05/2016 Philadelphia.CBSlocal.com202. Sources say teams of detectives have visited the Main Line High School and are in the process of interviewing as many as 60 or 70 students, for an alleged assault during the hazing that may have injured one student.

Sources tell CBS 3 that the investigation centers on allegations of “ritual hazing among team players, that occurred on the same day every week. A day, sources say, on which some students told detectives they deliberately avoided the gym at certain times. Sources also say that no students have been criminally charged or disciplined by school officials.

The source of the leak is not known. Obviously, it was someone who was familiar with what had been told to detectives. This wording doesn’t sound like the usual lawyerly statement by a T/E School District official. Whoever it was had given some fairly detailed information from inside an investigation that had just started. “Ritual hazing?” That seems like a hasty conclusion; salacious too.

How did the press get so much information so early in the investigation? Mr. Hogan later said it was Conestoga parents who leaked to the press.801. But how would parents know that “… no students have been criminally charged …?”

Regardless of who had talked to the press, one thing was certain. The court of public opinion was now in session.

Chapter 10: Headwinds.

Many people close to the situation already had doubts about the sexual assault allegation. But it was certainly plausible … and worrisome … that an altercation of some kind took place in the

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

9

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

football team locker room. The news that a child may have been injured was a matter of deep concern. The Conestoga community anxiously awaited Mr. Hogan’s official statement.

In the meantime, people were trying to figure out what happened. It was rumored that the Student’s refusal to help sweep the locker room caused an altercation that led to the alleged sexual assault incident. Mr. Hogan would later call this a hazing incident. This became a point of interest early on.

According to sources, chore assignment was a basic aspect of team operations and was governed by team policy. There was plenty to do, both on and off the field. Everybody pitched in as needed. The 1st year players, mostly varsity sophomores, but occasionally varsity freshmen, were responsible for transporting certain equipment to and from the practice field.

They were also responsible for sweeping the locker room after practice. Team policies, including chore assignments, were reviewed with the players at the start of each season.

Insiders did not understand why players would be sweeping the locker room before practice as the Student apparently alleged. Insiders did not understand why a chore assignment would later be connected to hazing. It is my understanding that no such connection had ever been made by players, coaches or District officials. Chore assignment on a football team of 60+ players was intended to teach personal responsibility. Chore assignment was not hazing. Any attempt to conflate the two would be disingenuous.

There was a lot to sort out regarding the alleged sexual assault incident. But another complicating factor began to emerge.

During the course of the sexual assault investigation, some incidents of childish locker room behavior had surfaced. It appeared that some of this behavior may have met the definition of hazing. Worse, some players had invented a concept titled “No Gay Thursday.” On Thursdays, some players engaged in inappropriate behavior and justified it as acceptable. Allegedly, the concept of “No Gay Thursday” spanned a period of several years.

The revelation of “No Gay Thursday” and the alleged hazing behavior in the locker room came as news to the head football coach. He had no knowledge of either until now; apparently, neither did District officials. That seemed odd.

In fact, it is my understanding that there had been no sign or symptom of a bullying or hazing problem. No player, parent, teacher, guidance counselor or administrator, student, fan or other person notified the head football coach or even implied that any player had been touched or hurt or felt troubled, angry, fearful or humiliated by hazing or other patterns of negative behavior by players in or out of the locker room. Regardless, locker room supervision was called into question.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

10

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

By all accounts, the coaches supervised the locker room in accordance with District policies and procedures. They worked to achieve the appropriate balance between adult supervision and the players’ right to privacy while they were changing. When the coaches were not in the locker room, one or more of the them was nearby within earshot.

Chapter 11: Please say there was a vetting process.

By the end of February 2016, tensions were mounting in the community as rumors about the investigation began to swirl. Back then, most people did not know that the Student was one of the teenagers accused in the cyber-bullying matter. They had no idea about the non-residency issue and the exchange of legal volleys between the Student’s family and the T/E School District.

Months later, with full knowledge of the backstory, many in the community would look back at this moment – the moment before Mr. Hogan went on TV – and see it as a crucial decision point. They would ask the obvious questions: 1. Did investigators rigorously test the authenticity of the Student’s allegations?

To summarize: In the span of three months, the Student, and/or by extension his family, was charged and arrested in the cyber-bullying matter, became the subject of a protective order filed by his victim, left Conestoga, transferred to a new school, was followed by the District’s private detective, engaged in a non-residency dispute with the District, and was billed for $13,443. And now, on top of everything else, the Student alleged that he had been the victim of a violent sexual assault more than three months prior and was living with the burden of that.

Luckily, our justice system upholds the guiding principle that a victim is always assumed to be a victim with no regard to motive. That is as it should be. If something - anything - bad had happened to the Student, it needed to be investigated thoroughly and right away. He was a child. He may have been a child in some trouble, but he was nonetheless precious.

That said, let’s face it. This particular sequence of events was an odd run-up to a sudden allegation of a violent sexual assault from three months earlier. One wonders how sure Mr. Hogan and the investigators really were about the Student’s testimony.

2. What was the status of the criminal charges against the Student?

Presumably, at this point in February 2016, the Student was still awaiting adjudication in juvenile court for his role in the cyber-bullying matter. It is fair to wonder whether the Student’s testimony about the alleged sexual assault - and whatever other information he gave to Mr. Hogan - affected the prosecution of the cyber-bullying case. If the Student testified in return for leniency, then the question of motive becomes a legitimate issue. But we will never know. Sealed and secret.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

11

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

The perpetrator of a heinous cyber-bullying crime became the victim of a heinous sexual assault … allegedly. And with that, Mr. Hogan stepped-up to the microphones. Everyone listened intently for a description of the evidence. It was expected to be iron-clad.

Chapter 12: Mr. Hogan goes on TV. On March 4, 2016, Mr. Hogan held a televised press conference in which he gave graphic detail about a vicious attack and a violent act of sodomy in the Conestoga football team locker room.

And that was just the tip of the iceberg. He alleged that the incident was just one example of a horrible culture of bullying and ritual hazing that the Conestoga football program had been harboring for years. He described it all in explicit detail, creating the impression that Conestoga football players were engaged in frequent acts of sexual deviancy, including sexual assault. Mr. Hogan bundled everything into one sensational story with “No Gay Thursday” as the tag line.

And he blamed it all - all of it - on the coaches for what he called a “shocking lack of supervision.”

Mr. Hogan’s news conference was picked up by countless media organizations throughout the country and elsewhere in the world. Conestoga football. Broomstick. Sodomy. Rape. Sexual Assault. Ritual Hazing. “No-Gay Thursday.” These would be the headlines. This was bad.

The full transcript of Mr. Hogan’s March 4th press conference could not be located on the Internet, and nothing is posted on the District Attorney’s web site with other press releases.

Author’s Note: In May 2018, a request was sent to the Chester County Office of Open Records (Right to Know Law) for a copy of the transcript from Mr. Hogan’s March 4th 2016 televised press conference. A representative of the District Attorney’s Office responded. She indicated that there was no transcript of Mr. Hogan’s March 4th 2016 press conference; nor was there any official press release on or about that date. She offered no other sources for the requested information. Evidently, it’s not our ‘right to know’ the full text of what Mr. Hogan said that day.

The following are excerpts of what could be transcribed from available video clips that were posted by local news outlets and still available on-line. Please note, these quotes may not be in actual chronological order.

“We are here today to announce charges against three juveniles. Because they are juveniles, I will not use their names. They are being charged in the juvenile system.” 215.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

12

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

“Three seniors holding down a freshman and violating him with a broomstick.”205.

“The kids knew the locker room was theirs. The locker room was theirs to do what they wanted, when they wanted and how they wanted.”205.

“Came to a head on No Gay Thursday because on this No Gay Thursday the underclassmen were ordered by the upperclassmen to strip to their underwear and clean the locker room for the upperclassmen before practice began. And the victim went along with it at first and stripped down to his boxers. But then he decided that he didn’t want any part of this. And tried to leave the locker room.

And he was grabbed. Blocked from leaving the locker room. And two of the upper classmen held him down. Two seniors – one of them 6 foot 2 260 pounds.

The other one 6 foot 180 pounds. So that’s over 400 pounds of seniors holding down this [redacted] freshman. And an order was given by one of the upperclassmen. And that order was – this is the exact quote – “shove a broom [redacted].” And then a senior upperclassman, the one who gave the order, grabbed a broom and started poking it between the victim’s legs. And he poked it and he poked it until he got underneath the victim’s boxers and he poked it until he did actually penetrate the student’s rectum. Kids reported that the victim was yelling and screaming. But he did not have a friend in that locker room on that afternoon. There was nobody to come to his rescue.”216.

“The freshmen might be ordered … the sophomores might be ordered ... to strip down to their underwear and clean … the locker room. They also had a tradition on No Gay Thursday of doing what they called blessing each other where they would use their hands to smack another kid on their backside or on their back.”205.

“They would have an older kid come behind a younger kid [redacted]. And that was okay on Thursdays.”215.

“Simple case about ignorance, violence and a shocking lack of supervision.”217.

“The lack of supervision here is the fact that all of this happened under the noses of the coaching staff. Because they were not there to supervise.”217.

“What we’re really talking about here is bigger stronger kids picking on smaller weaker kids. This is just bullying. And in Chester County we won’t stand for bullying.”204.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

13

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

Here are some other statements made by Mr. Hogan to the Associated Press: 03/04/2016 APNews.com203. There is no evidence the coaching staff was aware of the assault on [redacted] or the team’s hazing culture, Hogan said, because the coaches typically stayed out of the locker room.

The [redacted] was arrogant about making the varsity team, and that rankled the older players, Hogan said.

“It just happened to be a perfect storm of this ‘No Gay Thursday’ tradition and them not liking this freshman and taking it out on him in a pretty horrible way”, he told the AP. “No Gay Thursdays” was a tradition started by the football team at least three or four years ago, in which behavior the team normally considered to be “gay” was considered “not gay” on Thursdays, Hogan said.

Some players would avoid the locker room on Thursdays, and some would quit altogether because of the hazing, Hogan said.

Other Mr. Hogan quotes of interest reported by various media: 03/04/2016 WGAL.com204. The D.A. doesn’t believe the football coaches were aware of the incident. But he criticized the fact that the football players were left unsupervised.

03/04/2016 NECN.com205. The incident occurred on what's known among students as "No Gay Thursday," when older players allegedly commit "gay" acts upon younger ones as part of a hazing tradition, according to Hogan. Although the case centers around the football team, Hogan said other student-athletes were either exposed to or involved in hazing incidents.

03/17/2016 HistoryLive.net401. The school’s football coaches maintained that they knew nothing about it. But students insisted that sexually-oriented hazing rituals often took place in the locker room on “No-Gay Thursdays” during the last three years, according to Thomas P. Hogan, the Chester County district attorney, who headed the investigation.

03/07/2016 People.com206. Hogan says the team’s coaches failed to supervise their players sufficiently. Had they, chances are [redacted] would never have been victimized, the prosecutor said.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

14

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

And then Mr. Hogan was interviewed by the New York Times: 03/14/2016 NYTimes.com207. Hogan, the district attorney, wanted to talk about the case, though. He wants everyone to know about it. He took the case public, though its documents are sealed because the defendants are juveniles. He told me that if hazing can happen at Conestoga, it can happen anywhere.

From Hogan’s perspective, every locker room should have a coach in it. And everyone who even hears about a ritual like No Gay Thursdays — including Conestoga’s coaches, who Hogan said “must have known” — should take a stand against it. He said he hoped this case would at least remind families, coaches and administrators that hazing is a problem. To stop it, he said, people must be proactive.

Evidently, Mr. Hogan ‘wanted everyone to know’ that there had been a violent sexual assault at Conestoga amid a horrible years-long culture of bullying and ritual hazing, and the coaches were to blame.

Once again, we see the flourish with which Mr. Hogan expresses himself on a public stage. “An order was given by one of the upperclassmen …” “All this happened under the noses of the coaches…” “But he [the Student] did not have a friend in the locker room that day.” “The kids knew the locker room was theirs. The locker room was theirs to do what they wanted, when they wanted and how they wanted.” Mr. Hogan’s word choice was hyperbolic. There was an element of theater in Mr. Hogan’s press briefing. … not what the Conestoga community expected or deserved.

Also, once again, Mr. Hogan seemed unrestrained in his public disclosure. He gave coarse graphic detail about alleged locker room behavior, with no supporting data, which he termed ‘sexually-oriented hazing rituals.’ Why? Players on the Conestoga football team were mostly minor children. Why did Mr. Hogan find it necessary to shame and disgrace them so publicly?

Isn’t that why records are sealed? … to protect minor children from harm? After Mr. Hogan’s press conference, Conestoga’s football players – and many other Conestoga’s students – were taunted and teased mercilessly in their dealings throughout Southeastern Pennsylvania. 703. Mr. Hogan used grossly salacious language, endangering minor children in the process.

Admittedly, it’s cheating to look back and criticize Mr. Hogan’s press conference with the knowledge that there was no sexual assault. But one wonders how he was able to offer such rich detail about a crime that didn’t happen. Had Mr. Hogan been lied to? If so, it was a fully formed and elaborate lie. Or is it possible that Mr. Hogan embellished the facts in his retelling? It’s a reasonable question to ask. Mr. Hogan’s version of events would change

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

15

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

materially during the year that followed. Be sure to read blog post: Bombshell #2: Omissions … and retractions?

If Mr. Hogan took liberties in describing the sexual assault, it’s fair to wonder if he took liberties in describing the alleged hazing too. The Conestoga community was deeply troubled by the notion that there may have been hazing activity in the football team locker room. People understood that hazing is a serious matter. People understood that “No Gay Thursday” was wildly inappropriate and insensitive. If any players engaged in bullying or hazing activities, disciplinary action would be required. But appropriate disciplinary action would depend on the extent and severity of the problem. It is my understanding that, prior to Mr. Hogan’s arrival, there had been no sign or symptom of a bullying or hazing problem. Not one Conestoga football player, parent, teacher, guidance counselor or administrator, student, fan or other person notified the head football coach or even implied that any player had been touched or hurt or felt troubled, angry, fearful or humiliated by hazing or other patterns of negative behavior by players in or out of the locker room. Yet Mr. Hogan went on television and portrayed a horrible years-long culture of bullying and ritual hazing at Conestoga. Under Mr. Hogan’s theory, at least 60 players had been routinely and callously hazed every Thursday against their will, yet all of them remained completely silent for more than three years. It’s possible, but not plausible. That gap in logic is never explained.

Without question, if Conestoga had a hazing problem immediate action was necessary. But fair is fair. Mr. Hogan was expected to accurately characterize the extent and severity of it. He offered no data. Yet somehow, he managed to effect a full-out “hazing” scandal … rooted in a sexual assault crime that never happened.

Mr. Hogan’s bold public statements about the Conestoga football program started a chain of events that put three teenagers in dire legal jeopardy. It cast a negative light on the school, the football program, the players and coaches. It caused irreparable damage to many reputations and ended careers in the process. This was no joke. Back in March 2016, everyone just hoped that Mr. Hogan knew what he was doing.

Chapter 13: The charges.

Mr. Hogan charged the three players, with assault, conspiracy, possession of an instrument of crime, unlawful restraint and terrorist threats. Wow. Apparently, if Mr. Hogan had his way, it would have been even worse for the three teens.

03/04/2016 8WGAL.com204. Three students are charged with assault and unlawful restraint charges but will not be charged with hazing because PA hazing

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

16

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

law only covers colleges not high school; something the D.A. says needs to change.

03/05/2016 The Philadelphia Inquirer214. Hogan said the three were not charged with a sexual offense because "from our perspective, it's a physical assault and not a sex crime." He added that the decision was made after consulting with the victim and his family.

03/04/2016 APNews.com203. “They [the three seniors] will not face sexual assault charges because the law requires a motive of sexual gratification, which was not the case here”, Hogan said.

03/04/2016 EPGN.com209. No hate crime charges are expected against three students charged in relation to weekly hazing among football players at Conestoga High School as part of so-called “No-Gay Thursdays,” Chester County District Attorney Tom Hogan told PGN. “We looked directly at that and we looked hard at it,” he said. “We have not uncovered any evidence that any of this was motivated explicitly by anti-LGBT bias. None of the kids who were targeted were gay.”

“But I can’t imagine if you are a gay student at Conestoga that ‘No Gay Thursdays’ made you feel particularly welcome or comfortable.”

Question: From Mr. Hogan’s remarks, one could reasonably conclude that the notion of “No Gay Thursday,“ while wildly inapproprate and insensitive, was not malicious in nature. If Mr. Hogan investigated hate speech and anti-LGBT bias and ruled these motivations out209., why did he sensationalize use of the term? … seems like a cheap shot.

Mr. Hogan stated that the Student and his family influenced the decision of whether the alleged attackers would be tried as adults or juveniles.214. He decided that the three players would be tried as juveniles. This decision had consequences, including: a. there would be no jury trial instead the case would be adjudicated in the juvenile system; and b. the names of the minor children would not be published.

Mr. Hogan also stated that the Student and his family influenced the decision of whether the alleged attackers would be charged with felony sexual assault or misdemeanor assault. 214. He decided that the alleged attackers would be charged with the lesser offense of misdemeanor assault and not felony sexual assault. Again, this decision had consequences, including: a. the records would be sealed and secret; and b. the hearings would be closed to the public.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

17

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

Of course, even though Mr. Hogan decided on the lesser charge of misdemeanor assault, for which the records would be sealed, he then went public in a pretty big way. Evidently there was not a very tight seal on this particular case. … at least not at first.

Mr. Hogan explained that the three players were not charged with sexual assault because it required a motive of sexual gratification which he said did not apply here.203. Oddly, a word search of Pennsylvania Code Title 18 Crimes and Offenses, Chapter 31 Sexual Offenses 902., shows no hits on the word or concept of “gratification.”

Later, Mr. Hogan gave another explanation of the charges: 06/04/2016 Spoke.com301. Hogan clarified that the three players were not charged with rape because, under Pennsylvania law, that crime requires sexual intercourse by forcible compulsion, or threat of force, or with an unconscious or impaired person. Hogan stated that in this case, there was no sexual intercourse, thereby making the charge of rape unavailable.

This time, a search of Pennsylvania Code Title 18 Crimes and Offenses, Chapter 31 Sexual Offenses902. supports Mr. Hogan’s assertion that the three accused players could not be charged with rape. But in the same text, it seems clear that the crime as Mr. Hogan described it on March 4th 2016 does meet the definition of sexual assault after all! (Section 3124.1 – engaging in ‘deviate sexual intercourse’ without the complainant’s consent is sexual assault … more…)

The alleged sexual assault in the Conestoga football case met the definition of ‘deviate sexual intercourse’ and therefore it met the definition of sexual assault … or it would have, had it actually happened.

Regardless of Mr. Hogan’s rolling explanation, the final charges do not align with the vicious attack he described in his March 4th press conference. Evidently, this was a felony sexual assault, not a misdemeanor assault. Was it Mr. Hogan’s practice to undercharge? Was it his practice to show leniency for sex offenders? Did he have doubts about the sexual assault allegation? We don’t know. Sealed and secret.

Chapter 14: The first thing we do, let’s kill all the … coaches.

Adapted from William Shakespeare’s “Henry The Sixth”, Part 2 Act 4, scene 2.904.

Author’s Note: Without a doubt, the welfare of the children involved will always be the top priority in any discussion about this matter. Their shocking stories are theirs to tell. This section

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

18

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

discusses the impact on the coaches. The coaches were also irreparably damaged by Mr. Hogan’s conduct in this case.

Mr. Hogan criticized the coaches mercilessly and often in his press comments. Notice, however, that Mr. Hogan did not have one harsh word for the T/E School District. He offered nothing but encouragement to District officials – even praise. The players and coaches didn’t have a chance.

If I could speak directly to Mr. Hogan, here’s what I would say: Mr. Hogan. Before you excoriated the coaches so publicly, I would like to know …

•

Did you ask what kind of relationships the coaches cultivated with administrators, team captains, team members and their parents? Do you know? I do.

•

Did you ask about the coaches’ safety record over the prior 15 years? Did you ask how many accidents or injuries were tied to negligence by the coaches? Do you know how many? I do.

•

Did you ask how effective the coaches were in handling disciplinary matters on and off the field? Do you know? I do.

•

Did you ask how many reported incidences of hazing there had been in the prior 15 years? Do you know how many? I do. (Spoiler: One. … and that was in 2007. The head coach addressed it immediately in cooperation with the parents and administrators.)

•

Did you ask how many players, parents, colleagues, guidance counselors or administrators, students, fans or other person notified the head football coach or even implied that any player had been touched or hurt or felt troubled, angry, fearful or humiliated by hazing or other patterns of negative behavior by players in or out of the locker room? Do you know how many? I do.

•

Did you ask how many disciplinary actions had been taken against the head football coach in 15 years of coaching football? Do you know how many? I do.

•

Did you ask how many times the head football coach had been hired by the District for coaching positions in the previous 35 years? Do you know? I do. (Spoiler: More than 64!)

•

Did you ask whether the head football coach followed District policies for locker room supervision? Do you know if he did? I do.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

19

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

•

Did you ask about the Code of Conduct that was signed by players and parents at the start of each season? Do you know what was in it? I do.

•

Did you ask how many players informed the head football coach that they avoided the locker room on Thursdays because of hazing (as you alleged)? Do you know how many?

I do.

•

Did you ask how many players informed the head football coach that they quit the team because of hazing (as you alleged)? Do you know how many? I do.

•

Did you ask how many “other student-athletes” informed the head football coach that they were “either exposed to or involved in hazing incidents” (as you alleged)? Do you know how many? I do.

•

Did you ask whether the enrollment of underclassmen on the team increased or decreased during the alleged years-long culture of bullying and ritual hazing? Do you know? I do.

•

Did you talk to all of the underclassmen and did they all feel targeted by the years-long culture of bullying and ritual hazing you allege? I’m betting you did not. Their answers probably would not fit your narrative.

•

Did you solicit feedback from players, parents, administrators, school colleagues, visiting teams and their coaches, football officials and others about the “culture” of the Conestoga football program? I’m betting you did not. Their answers definitely would not fit your narrative.

Mr. Hogan prosecuted the coaches in the court of public opinion, without the benefit of due process.

One final word about Mr. Hogan’s March 2016 press remarks. Mr. Hogan clearly said there was no evidence that the coaches knew about an alleged assault incident, “No Gay Thursday” or the alleged hazing behavior. Then, when interviewed by the New York Times, Mr. Hogan said that they (the coaches) “must have known.”207. In another interview he called the alleged hazing behavior “the worst kept secret in the world.”212. He was a law enforcement official speaking to the media. Was he ignoring the actual evidence and going rogue in front of the press?

Grandstanding like this made a serious situation much more dangerous for the coaches. Mr. Hogan helped set the stage for a civil action against them, as we shall see.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

20

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

Chapter 15: Mr. Hogan goes to Harrisburg.

Oddly, from what I could gather, Mr. Hogan mentioned the sexual assault (penetration with a broomstick) only once and briefly in his March 4th televised press conference. With that one statement, though, he sparked the outrage of people in Southeastern PA and across the country. But almost immediately, he shifted focus to “No-Gay Thursday” and the alleged locker room hazing behavior he had uncovered in the investigation.

It’s possible that Mr. Hogan used the alleged sexual assault crime as a means of elevating the hazing issue for political purposes. He told the press that he wanted hazing to be a crime at the high school level, not just at the college level.204. Legislation to achieve his goal was pending at the time of the alleged incident. It came as no surprise when two months later, in May 2016, Mr. Hogan worked with the PA State Legislature to help finally pass new anti-hazing legislation for high schools (effective July 24th). The politicians seemed quick to embrace Mr. Hogan, fresh off his sexual assault investigation at Conestoga.

03/14/2016 “The Philadelphia Inquirer.” 402. The lack of a hazing charge was the result of a "glaring omission" in state law, said Chester County District Attorney Tom Hogan. Last week, state Sen. Sen. Andy Dinniman (D., Chester), the committee's minority chairman, urged the majority chairman, Sen. Lloyd Smucker (R., Lancaster), to call for a vote. Hogan said he supported that move. Dinniman said he plans to introduce an amendment requiring schools to give coaches written copies of their anti-hazing policies and to lay out penalties for violations.

"While the Conestoga High situation was criminal in action, broadening antihazing statutes would be a preventative measure that could go a long way in deterring hazing from reaching the serious criminal level it did at Conestoga…"

07/16/2016 “The Philadelphia Inquirer.” 403. State Rep. Ron Marsico (R., Dauphin), who introduced the anti-hazing legislation last fall, celebrated its passage in May, saying the state's laws "need to reflect the severity of these actions and impose appropriate punishments." The state Senate passed the bill unanimously, and the House approved it by 180-15.

Chapter 16: One not-so-small problem.

Mr. Hogan may have seen himself as the champion of legislative reform, but there was a problem. He was called in to investigate a sexual assault at Conestoga. However, there was no sexual assault. Instead we would watch him prosecute a “hazing case” – of unknown extent and severity – in the court of public opinion - to the full extent of a law that did not even exist in

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

21

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

March 2016. Normally, District officials and coaches would have the opportunity to prepare for the implementation of a new law. There would be a policy review and refinement process.

There would be an audit of current operations. There would be education for District officials, coaches, players and parents. In this case, Mr. Hogan prosecuted a future law and did so very publicly with absolute zero-tolerance.

As soon as Mr. Hogan determined that there was insufficient evidence of a sexual assault or other injury - whenever that was - why did he not move out of the way? Without the sexual assault, there was no crime. Without a crime, his presence at Conestoga was not required. The T/E School District would have handled an incident of bullying or hazing as an internal school matter. But Mr. Hogan never killed the sexual assault story. He held his ground instead, and he created a firestorm.

Mr. Hogan got national exposure as an anti-hazing right-fighter and blew-up Conestoga in the process.

Chapter 17: Bits of conflicting evidence appear in the public domain. … back to our story.

From the start of this investigation, many in the Conestoga football orbit raised doubts about the veracity of the Student’s sexual assault allegation.

Then two video images surfaced that further galvanized the community. In one video, the Student implied that he lied about the sexual assault.503. (Full Disclosure: The Student implied that it didn’t happen and then implied that it did.) In another video, a game film, the Student was pictured on the sidelines cheering for his alleged attacker one day after the alleged incident allegedly occurred. 503. Whatever might have happened in the locker room on October 15th – sexual assault or assault or even harassment (stay tuned) – the Student was seen cheering one day later.

08/02/2016 DailyLocal.com503. This is the latest in a series of peculiarities about the hazing case to surface. The alleged victim can be seen on one of the defendant’s highlight reels during the 2015 football season, clapping for him when Conestoga played against [Redacted] High School less than a day after the alleged hazing incident occurred, Oct. 16.

Additionally, [Parent Name redacted], a father of a Conestoga football player, said when he and his son were interviewed by detectives working on the case, they reportedly told him the locker room was empty when the alleged incident

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

22

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

occurred. This differs with information Hogan provided at his news conference.

Hogan said the incident occurred with other team members present, but they looked the other way.

The notion that the sexual assault allegation was a hoax was gaining traction. But Mr. Hogan wasn’t revising his position, and all of the records were sealed and secret. For the people whose lives were being shattered by this scandal, it was almost unbearable.

Chapter 18: Mr. Hogan’s folly.

By June 2016, the community remained frustrated. Many of the locals did not believe that a sexual assault had occurred at all. Yet the three players were still battling charges of assault, conspiracy, possession of an instrument of crime, unlawful restraint and terrorist threats.

There were inordinate delays in scheduling a hearing date for the three accused players. 505.

Each side blamed the other. 505. During the delay, sources say that the three players were repeatedly pressured to take a plea deal. But they refused, staunchly affirming their innocence.505. All the while, Mr. Hogan was using the Conestoga “hazing” case to help the PA State Legislature enact reform.

Then tragedy struck. One of the families involved in this case suffered a most profound loss, some say due to the pressure of Mr. Hogan’s prosecution. Their story is private and it is theirs to tell.

This was the moment when insiders realized the power Mr. Hogan had over ordinary citizens.

They trusted him to be right. And if he was wrong, they trusted him to admit it. These were citizens of Chester County. These were the people Mr. Hogan was elected to serve. And now the lives of the players and their families – the coaches too - had been changed forever.

Chapter 19: Meanwhile … back to the non-residency matter.

As noted, in March 2016, after the Student made the sexual assault allegation, the entire nonresidency matter was temporarily put on hold.

A hearing was finally held in August 2016. The Judge ruled in favor of the Student, not the T/E School District. The ruling was based partly on procedural errors by the District.504. The substantive issue was whether the Student could claim his family’s home (located outside of Chester County) as his primary address. 504. The Judge determined he could not – reason

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

23

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

unknown. 504. Consequently, the Student could legitimately lay claim to a free education in the T/E School District. The T/E School District would continue to be responsible for his tuition at an alternative private school.

08/16/2016 MainLineMediaNews.com504. According to court documents, Sommer [Court of Common Pleas Judge Jeffrey R. Sommer], drew his conclusion from two issues. First, he determined the hearing officer from an earlier meeting incorrectly concluded the alleged hazing victim did not meet the federal definition of homeless.

The alleged victim could not claim the [County redacted] residence as his, according to court documents, essentially depriving him the chance to pursue a free education in [County redacted], and Sommer determined the alleged victim met the federal definition of homeless. He also criticized the hearing officer’s original finding.

The non-residency issue was resolved. Presumably, the criminal charges against the Student in the cyber-bullying matter had been adjudicated in juvenile court or soon would be (outcome unknown – sealed and secret). The parties were still waiting for a hearing date in the alleged sexual assault matter.

Chapter 20: Big talk.

Mr. Hogan continued to face pressure from the Berwyn community. Evidently, he was prepared to retaliate. Taxpayers of Chester County, be warned: expect to be scolded - even threatened - when you question your elected officials!

08/17/2016 Phoenixvillenews.com505. [Parent Name redacted], the father of one of the defendants in the Conestoga High School hazing case, said Chester County District Attorney Tom Hogan has not yet brought the case to court, is intentionally dragging the process out, and attempting to save face after making the case a national incident without sufficient evidence to prosecute.

[Parent Name redacted] said he believes Hogan does not have sufficient evidence to successfully prosecute the case, stating he only has a handful of witnesses and nothing else.

Of the witnesses, he said the police reportedly used heavy-handed methods to extract confessions from players who were at least 18 years of age. According to

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

24

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

[Parent Name redacted], the police allegedly threatened to charge witnesses if they refused to talk.

When asked for comment, the Chester County District Attorney’s Office released the following statement by email: “These claims are simply not accurate. The delays in this case have uniformly come from the defense. The commonwealth has been ready and willing to try this case for months.

“We suggest that [Parent Name redacted] consult his counsel before continuing to shop inaccurate information to the media. This is the same selective story that he has been delivering to other media. We often see this tactic, in both social media and regular media, from family members of people charged with crimes.

“This case was carefully reviewed by multiple layers of police and prosecutors.

The commonwealth will see [Parent Name redacted] in court, where he may present his version of the truth.”

Mr. Hogan’s response to this father was another example of the aggressive approach Mr. Hogan had taken throughout the prosecution of the case. He had successfully controlled the narrative, but subtle signs of stress began to surface. Here is an August 2016 quote from Mr. Hogan’s office: 08/02/2016 DailyLocal.com503. “This case has never depended solely on the victim,” Noone [First Assistant District Attorney Michael Noone] wrote. “There are multiple eyewitnesses to this assault. Multiple other students gave recorded statements to police that these juveniles assaulted the victim with a broom.

Those eyewitness accounts were critical in the charging decision.”

The DA’s Office also stated that law enforcement often does deal with inconsistent witness statements and wrote there are “often coordinated efforts by criminals to attack the victim or the prosecution.”

Five months after his March 4th press conference, Mr. Hogan’s office is finally talking publicly about eye-witnesses … but to what? Did Mr. Hogan have eye-witnesses to a sexual assault?

That was the crime he described in his televised press conference on March 4th.

In addition, for the first time, we are learning about the possibility of “inconsistent witness statements.” The Assistant D.A. actually seems to compare his witnesses – a group of teenage

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

25

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

football players – to “criminals” who coordinate their efforts “to attack the victim or the prosecution.” Mr. Hogan’s office suddenly appeared to be on the defensive.

One wonders if Mr. Hogan might have started to worry about his brand at this point. He had managed to elevate the issue of hazing in high school. In May he helped finally pass new antihazing legislation in the PA Legislature. Mr. Hogan had very good reason to cling to his ‘version of the truth.’ Surely, he would be humiliated if word got out that his star political platform was built on a … false premise.

Chapter 21: Making it a federal case.

Throughout the fall of 2016, the three accused players and their families continued to wait for a hearing date in juvenile court. They consistently declared their innocence with respect to the criminal charges against them.

Fueled, no doubt, by Mr. Hogan’s public pronouncements, the Student and his family took one more step. In November 2016, the Student’s family sued T/E School District, Conestoga High School and all six coaches individually in federal court.

The civil action by the Student and his family openly sought a civil remedy for damages.

Presumably, there would be no payday in Mr. Hogan’s prosecution of the criminal charges against the three players.

The civil complaint was bold. More importantly, it was not sealed (at first). It was rife with new accusations and it defamed the players and the coaches all over again.

The civil complaint seized on Mr. Hogan’s portrayal of a horrible years-long culture of bullying and ritual hazing at Conestoga, and it perpetuated use of the term “No Gay Thursday.” The civil complaint also seized on Mr. Hogan’s condemnation of the coaches. In fact, many of the allegations in the civil complaint seem to have been taken directly from Mr. Hogan’s public statements. The civil complaint cited no independent investigation, they cited no independent witnesses or evidence.

The coaches had not been deposed in the civil suit. Still, the civil complaint devoted paragraphs to speculation about what the coaches knew, what they overheard, what they were thinking, where they were and how they reacted to the alleged hazing behavior. That seemed an odd choice when even Mr. Hogan said there was no evidence that the coaches knew about any of it.

The civil complaint was also very scattered. On one hand it was an indictment of the head football coach’s leadership, and on the other it referred to his anti-hazing policy, his teaching of

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

26

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

that policy and his adept handling of disciplinary matters in general. The civil complaint also gives several examples where the coaches were in the locker room, thereby contradicting its own claim that the coaches refrained from entering the locker room.

For most of the named defendants in the civil suit this was a real initiation. It was hard to believe that time and treasure would be devoted to such an incongruous complaint. Everyone was keenly focused on the criminal hearing, now set for January 3rd 2017. That outcome would either give life to the civil complaint or discredit it completely.

One final note: According to sources, the T/E School District attempted to subpoena records about the sexual assault investigation, presumably in preparation for the civil suit against them.

02/14/2017 The Spoke 615. On Nov. 29, 2016, undersigned counsel for TESD and Conestoga High School served upon the District Attorney’s Office a subpoena to produce all investigative materials relating to the three juvenile matters including witness and suspect statements, interview summaries, reports, complaints and transcripts that TESD was never granted access to.

Apparently, Mr. Hogan replied that the records could not be released without a court order, citing confidentiality concerns. 615.

That’s rich.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

27

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

2017

Chapter 22: Mr. Hogan’s case falls apart.

In January 2017, it was finally time for the criminal hearing that would determine consequences for the three accused players.

The hearing confirmed what everybody already knew. There had been no sexual assault. There had been no assault. Evidently, all of Mr. Hogan’s original charges - assault, conspiracy, possession of an instrument of crime, unlawful restraint and terrorist threats - were dropped.

In the end, the three players pled guilty to a summary offense of harassment. Their records would be expunged after six months.610. That’s what we know. Most likely, the parties are legally bound to not speak publicly about it.

Here are some excerpts from press reports about the criminal hearing.

01/03/2017 6ABC.com601. Now the victim has backtracked on his story.

01/03/2017 Daily Local.com602. However, the statement makes no mention of the alleged sodomy, instead stating that one of the defendants “briefly poked the victim in the leg.”

01/03/2016 Delgazette.com603. Tuesday’s statement by Chester County District Attorney Thomas Hogan and attorneys for the three Conestoga High School seniors said the [redacted] freshman “did not suffer any physical injury” in the October 2015 encounter, though one of the seniors “briefly poked the victim with a broom stick in the leg.” That description was in stark contrast to Hogan’s characterization of it in March, when charges including assault, conspiracy, unlawful restraint and terroristic threats were announced against the 17-yearolds at the school in Berwyn, about 25 miles northwest of Philadelphia.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

28

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

01/03/2017 DailyCaller.com604. Hogan originally said in March when the charges were first introduced that no coaches were present during the incident and that no one came to the victim’s rescue as he screamed in pain, according to Philly Voice. In fact, the original statements from the District Attorney’s Office were noticeably different than the statement released Tuesday.

01/03/2017 SavvyMainLine.com605. And remember the DA’s vile account of what went down in the locker room in October 2015?

Well, that’s been dropped, too. Or at least radically revised.

“One of the charged juveniles poked the victim with a broom stick in the leg,” reads the statement issued jointly today by Chester County DA Tom Hogan and lawyers for the three defendants.

So much for the horrific broom stick sodomy the DA described when he announced charges in a televised news conference last March.

01/04/2017 PennLive.com606. In the end, the hazing incident by some older players on the Conestoga High School football team wasn't as outrageous as first alleged by the Chester County District Attorney, who originally described the October 2015 incident this way, according to NBC-10 in Philly: DA Tom Hogan initially said older players were accused of [redacted] and poking a younger player in between his legs with a broomstick.

But in a statement announcing the guilty pleas by three players, each to a criminal summary offense of harassment, the incident was described this way: "one of the charged juveniles briefly poked the victim with a broomstick in the leg," NBC-10 reports, …

01/12/2017 PhillyVoice.com607. A joint statement by the district attorney and attorneys for the three former players walked back Hogan's previous claims, saying one of the charged juveniles only "briefly poked the victim with a broomstick in the leg."

The statement said the victim "did not suffer any physical injury," but only reported the incident to his father after he was charged with a separate juvenile offense several months later. It said the victim, the three former football players and Hogan were "in full agreement with this disposition."

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

29

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

Chapter 23: Joint Statement by Mr. Hogan and the defense attorneys.

Here is the joint statement by Mr. Hogan and the defense attorneys. Notice that it makes reference to charges in a hazing incident, not a sexual assault. … a bit of revisionist history to be sure. This was a sexual assault investigation. Hazing, while indisputably wrong, was not a crime at the time of the incident. Besides, Mr. Hogan never explained how chore assignment (sweeping the locker room floor) became associated with hazing at all.

01/03/2017 savvymainline.com.605. For the record, the official statement from the DA’s office and defense attorneys Vincent DiFabio, Timothy Woodward and Michael Malloy reads as follows: “The following is a joint statement from the Chester County District Attorney’s Office and defense counsel for the three juveniles charged in the Conestoga High School football hazing incident. The three juveniles have accepted responsibility for their conduct. They have made an admission to the criminal summary offense of harassment, which makes it a crime to intentionally subject another person to physical contact. On a Thursday afternoon, the juvenile victim and other younger football players were directed to clean the locker room. When the victim refused to clean and attempted to leave the locker room, he was shoved, pushed and briefly held down by the three charged juveniles in an effort to get him to clean the locker room. One of the charged juveniles briefly poked the victim with a broom stick in the leg. The intent of the charged juveniles was to scare the victim and coerce him to cooperate with other team members in the joint cleanup of the locker room, and not to do the victim any physical harm. The victim did not suffer any physical injury, and reported the incident to his father months later, after the victim was charged with a juvenile offense.

The juvenile victim, the Chester County District Attorney’s Office, and the three juveniles charged are in full agreement with this disposition. Because this case is a juvenile matter, all the records are sealed and the parties will not be making any further public comment. The victim, the charged juveniles, and their respective families all would like the opportunity to move on with their lives. We all hope never to see an incident like this in Chester County again.” that.

One might assume that the harassment charge was based on an admission of some physical contact, perhaps in the form of being ‘shoved and pushed, briefly held down and briefly poked in the leg with a broomstick.’ Remember, though, that the Joint Statement reflects a compromise among the parties. There may not have been total agreement on the wording.

Even the harassment charge might have been an overreach. We don’t know. But the matter

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

30

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

had been finally adjudicated. We had a negotiated description of an altercation between the Student and the three players in the Conestoga football team locker room on … wait … what was the date of the incident? … “on a Thursday afternoon” according to the Joint Statement?

That’s odd. No date is given here. Huh. Something’s fishy about this. Be sure to read blog post: Bombshell #1: Disappearing dates.

Without question, ‘shoving, pushing, being briefly held down and being briefly poked in the leg’ are all wrong and inexcusable behaviors among teenagers or anyone else. No one should be bullied and/or subjected to a violation of their physical space. If that’s what happened, the players would deserve to be disciplined according to T/E School District policy.

That said, one wonders how often an incident of this magnitude ends up in the juvenile court system, preceded by a months-long national media circus, overblown criminal charges against teenagers, their arrest, protracted legal jeopardy for the accused and so many others, a civil suit, job losses, slander and worse. In the end, the charge against the three players was a summary offense – the same magnitude as a parking ticket.

Chapter 24: Press gives the side-eye.

It was interesting to see how the press covered the outcome of the criminal hearing. There were a few brave reporters and media outlets who wrote about miscarriage of justice. But for the most part, the headlines still seemed to slant toward the guilt (not the innocence) of the three accused players. There was no measurable outrage over Mr. Hogan’s failure in the criminal case or the false accusation made by the Student.

The full story can be found in the bibliography referenced below (Sources #601 to #615).

Chapter 25: More seals. More secrets.

The outcome in the criminal hearing spelled trouble for the civil suit. Suddenly, those records were sealed and made secret too.

01/12/2017 PhillyVoice.com607. U.S. District Judge Gerald A. McHugh signed a protective order to ensure confidential information is limited to the attorneys on January 4 — the day after Hogan announced the criminal case had concluded.

Imagine the frustration of being someone who was defamed by this false story. The truth had surfaced yet it was still out of reach. Every record was sealed. Every hearing was secret. The

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

31

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

parties were probably bound by a confidentiality agreement. The players and coaches had been badly slandered. Mr. Hogan had the power to fix it, but he didn’t.

Chapter 26: The coaches are excused.

According to sources, in February 2017, one month after the hearing in the criminal case against the three players, the coaches were suddenly dismissed as defendants in the civil suit without explanation. There were no terms. There were no next steps. They signed no release or agreement of any kind. They stood accused of nothing. No details were provided, even to the coaches themselves! Sealed and secret.

The case continued with the T/E School District as the one remaining defendant.

Chapter 27: The civil suit ends.

In May 2017, the civil suit was finally settled … or dropped … or dismissed. The terms are unknown. … sealed and secret.

Chapter 28: Mr. Hogan gets the last word. … or does he?

In June 2017, still facing pressure from the community, Mr. Hogan issued a surprising press release.801. In it he asserted one more time that he got this case right, even though the adjudication of the case ruled otherwise.

Mr. Hogan said he obtained permission from a Judge (unnamed) to defend his version of events in the sealed case. Presumably, the records were unsealed then resealed. Who knew that was even possible?

In a scant 3,350 words, Mr. Hogan subtly re-worked the version he told at his original March 4th 2016 press conference. Prepare, dear readers, for some artful wordsmithing. Be sure to read blog post: Mr. Hogan in defense of Mr. Hogan. Seeing Red.

June 29, 2017 Conestoga High School is an outstanding school. Located in the Tredyffrin-Easttown School District in Chester County, the school is consistently ranked as one of the best in the state and nation. The District

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

32

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

Attorney’s Office is proud to host Conestoga seniors as interns every year, and these students have proven to be bright, collegial, and well-spoken.

However, Conestoga has had a tough couple of years. A cyber-bullying scandal. A hazing case with the football team, ending with three juveniles pleading guilty. A female teacher’s aide convicted of having sex with a male student. A male staff member charged with having sex with a female student.

The majority of Conestoga parents and the general public have been justifiably concerned. The majority of Conestoga parents and students have responded appropriately and responsibly. Other school communities in Chester County, both public and private, have dealt with criminal issues in their high schools in an honest and straightforward manner, corrected the underlying issues and moved on.

However, there is a small and very vocal minority of Conestoga football supporters who continue to misrepresent and distort the hazing case involving the football team. There have been factual misrepresentations, victim blaming and shaming, and a culture of denial. All of this conduct sends a message that victims should not report crimes and cases should not be prosecuted, which are very dangerous messages. There has been a repeated public demand for a detailed description of the investigation, including comments from some of the families actually involved in the cases, even though the cases are now finished. Such misinformation merits a response to the public to explain the actions of the District Attorney’s Office and serves an important law enforcement purpose in protecting future cases.

Because of all of these factors, the District Attorney’s Office requested and received permission from the court to publicly comment on the investigation to set the record straight regarding the Conestoga investigation. In addition, this description of the investigation will serve as a valuable tool for prosecutors and the public in understanding the difficulties in hazing cases, an often hidden area that is just now coming to light and needs to be addressed. See here (describing other hazing cases). That description of the investigation follows.

In 2015, there was a cyber-bullying prosecution involving students who were then in their freshman year at Conestoga. One of the accused juveniles was a 14 year old male freshman on the varsity football team. This juvenile was perceived by many of the older football players to be cocky and abrasive.

During the course of the cyber-bullying prosecution, the father of the accused juvenile reported to the high school that his son had been the subject of hazing months before by the Conestoga football team, including an incident involving a broomstick inserted into his son’s rectum. As required by law, this report was given to the Tredyffrin Township Police Department, who consulted with the District Attorney’s Office.

Our initial reaction was skeptical. This sounded like a parent who was looking for leverage in his own son’s criminal case. In addition, a delayed report case is always difficult to prosecute. However, the allegation was serious. The Chester County Detectives were assigned to assist the Tredyffrin Township Police Department in investigating this allegation. They were instructed to interview the alleged juvenile victim and other players from the football team.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

33

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

The victim was interviewed by a Chester County Detective who is specially trained to interview juveniles.

The victim reported that he was ordered by senior football players to clean the locker room in his underwear. When he tried to leave, he was pushed back into the locker room. Two named senior players held him down. A third named senior player poked him with a broomstick, briefly penetrating his rectum.

The detective reported that the juvenile was credible. He had appropriate and specific details. He also was reluctant to discuss the matter, because it was embarrassing.

Where possible, a case is not built on one victim’s word. (Although as a matter of law, the victim’s word alone can be sufficient to charge and convict.) Other witnesses were interviewed. Multiple teams of detectives were detailed to the investigation. Those detectives interviewed 38 players, students, and coaches.

Instead of hearing that nothing had happened, the detectives came back with substantial details. The detectives reported that there was a tradition called “No Gay Thursdays” at Conestoga, where things that the players normally considered “gay” were not considered “gay.” Thus, the older players would drop their [redacted] onto the heads of younger players, make the younger players clean the locker room in their underwear, “bless” other players by striking their bare skin with open-handed slaps to leave a hand print, “grind” on other players’ legs, engage in a practice called “vortexing” (involving sneaking behind another player and placing fingers into an intimate area), and other rituals. Virtually every member of the team interviewed confirmed “No Gay Thursdays” in graphic detail. Both the team members and the coaches stated that the players generally were unsupervised in the locker room, which allowed the practice to continue.

Regarding the assault on the victim, the detectives reported that they had multiple other students who independently confirmed the assault with the broomstick. These players reported that the victim was held down and poked with the broomstick. One of the other players reported that the one senior player was poking at the victim with the broomstick like the senior player was chipping away at ice. Those witnesses obviously could not confirm if there was any penetration; only the victim would be able to confirm that detail. The players were interviewed separately to prevent any contamination of their stories. The interviews were audio recorded and parents were present for the interviews with the students who confirmed the broomstick incident. These players were friends with the accused three seniors and did not like the victim, so their incentives were not to lie for the victim.

The detectives also attempted to interview the three accused senior players. The father of one of the players accused of holding down the victim simply refused to allow his son to be interviewed. The other player accused of holding the victim down denied any knowledge. The player accused of wielding the broomstick admitted, “I guess I yelled, ‘Shove the broom up his ass.’” But he denied doing it himself.

The senior players and their lawyers were advised about the victim’s report and corroborating details from other witnesses. They were told to tell the truth and accept responsibility if they expected any leniency.

The defense was given every opportunity, both then and at other times, to admit that the incident with the broomstick occurred, but the players did not know if the broom penetrated the victim’s rectum or

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

34

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

never meant that to happen. Under all of the circumstances in this case, the entire incident could have been resolved then and there, with the same charges that the juveniles eventually pled to. The defense declined.

The case was reviewed by multiple levels of prosecutors and detectives. The case was assigned to two prosecutors: a former Marine JAG Corps prosecutor, who has dealt with criminal hazing cases in the military; and an experienced juvenile prosecutor. Every person who reviewed the case agreed that charges were warranted.

As is our customary practice, the District Attorney’s Office next discussed charging options with the victim and his family. The options included: (1) charging the three juveniles with a felony sex crime, possibly as adults, which would have made the names of the charged juveniles public and all proceedings public; (2) charging the three juveniles with misdemeanors and summaries, such as assault and harassment, keeping the proceedings in juvenile court and the names confidential; or (3) not charging the juveniles at all. The victim and his family, having been through the juvenile system and aware of the nature of the case, stated a strong preference for the second option, a charge of misdemeanors and summaries. Taking into consideration all of the circumstances of the case, the District Attorney’s Office honored the victim’s request.

During these discussions, the District Attorney’s Office also looked at the general issue of high school hazing. We discovered that similar hazing incidents were occurring across the United States. The national media recently has commented on the same issues that our research revealed. (See the ESPN Report.)

We also discovered that the criminal offense of hazing did not cover high schools in Pennsylvania, so the senior players could not be charged with hazing.

In the interim, we received media inquiries. Reporters had heard from Conestoga parents about a player being sodomized with a broomstick. The media intended to run with the story, and already had started broadcasting preliminary reports. We told the media that we would make a statement that set forth the factual allegations and stop the rumor mill.

We held a press conference. We discussed the victim’s allegations, the corroborating witnesses, the “No Gay Thursday” culture, the criminal charges, and the lack of a hazing law covering high schools. The District Attorney’s Office was publicly criticized in equal parts for not being harsh enough and being too harsh.

The District Attorney’s Office turned over to the defense the extensive results of the investigation. There were approximately 500 pages of reports and 20 DVDs of recorded witness interviews.

We expected that the case would go to trial by the summer of 2016, because it was in the juvenile system. The prosecution was fully prepared to try the case. We also wanted the case resolved in the summer before the witnesses went to college. However, the defense repeatedly continued the trial, legitimately citing a health issue for one of the defense lawyers. Nevertheless, delay generally works to the advantage of the defense and the disadvantage of the prosecution. (After the charges were filed, two of the accused juveniles were offered a “consent decree”, which would have allowed them to admit to their conduct but not be convicted of any offenses if they stayed out of trouble. They declined. The father

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

35

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

of the player who declined to allow his son to be interviewed announced to the media his refusal to take advantage of the consent decree option.)

The backlash from the Conestoga football loyalists was pronounced and immediate. A few of the responses included: (1) boys will be boys, this happens everywhere; (2) the victim is a bad kid, nobody likes him or his father; and (3) complete denial – nothing happened, not “No Gay Thursdays,” not the broomstick incident, nothing. They attacked the police and prosecutors. They did this in public meetings and social media.

We pointed out: (1) this went way beyond “boys being boys”; (2) blaming the victim was inappropriate, and the fact that the players did not like him was evidence of motive; and (3) there were independent witnesses.

The Tredyffrin-Easttown School District (the “School District”) took independent actions. They accepted the resignation of the head football coach, but subsequently hired him back to Conestoga in a security job. The School District fired the rest of the coaches. These decisions were made solely by the School District, based on the School District’s own internal investigation into “No Gay Thursdays.”

The School District expelled the victim based on the cyber-bullying case. The School District suspended but did not expel the three senior football players.

The School District also decided to sue the victim. They claimed that the victim did not officially live in the district and now owed them over $10,000. The School District lost this suit and was ordered to pay for the victim’s education at a different school.

Also during this interim period, a video of the victim surfaced. Another football player/student from Conestoga caught the victim on a train and told him that he was threatening the future of the three senior players. In that conversation, the victim initially stated that his father told him what to say, then went back to saying the incident did happen. This interaction was recorded, including both the victim’s statement about his father and the victim’s confirmation that the incident did happen. The attorney for the student or students who participated in recording the interaction alerted the District Attorney’s Office to the existence of the video, but realized that the recording was a probable Wiretap Act violation, and thus requested immunity for the students as a condition of producing the video to the District Attorney’s Office. The District Attorney’s Office agreed not to prosecute the recording students and immediately turned the video over to the defense lawyers, with the caveat that that the video was a probable Wiretap Act violation and had to be kept secure.

The prosecutors and detectives reviewed the video. The video looked like a circumstance that prosecutors see often in criminal cases, which is an attempt by defendants’ friends to pressure a victim into providing an inconsistent statement. This is part of the “Stop Snitching” culture that exists in many places, from Philadelphia to Conestoga, from drug gangs to athletic teams. It is a concerted attempt by individuals or a community to derail the criminal justice process. Any kid caught alone and by surprise might blurt out anything when confronted by defendants’ friends. In this case, the recording loses steam when the victim goes back to saying that the incident happened. The video made the prosecution more difficult, but did not change our view of what happened in the case (particularly because the video includes the victim

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

36

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

standing by the incident and the facts that the incident was still reported by independent witnesses).

Somebody then gave the video to the media for public dissemination, possibly illegal conduct. This was another apparently coordinated tactic to attempt to discredit the victim. (The father of the charged juvenile who refused to allow his son to be interviewed in the investigation also publicly was quoted by the media claiming that the District Attorney’s Office was delaying the case. This claim was false. This attack was aimed at the specifically at the prosecutors, rather than the victim.)

The other senior players who had reported witnessing the incident were not looking forward to testifying against their senior team-mates, but they remained steadfast in their testimony. They faced enormous public pressure from the football loyalists to recant and prosecutors were repeatedly assured that they would recant. Again, the “Stop Snitching” culture at work. However, these young men had the courage and parental support to remain truthful.

The case was finally set to go to trial in early 2017. Every prosecutor and detective on the case continued to believe that the incident took place.

As often occurs as a trial approaches and all of the parties have had an opportunity to review every bit of discovery and grapple with the potential ramifications of trial, the defense presented a plea proposal.

The lawyers for the players asked if their clients could plead guilty to the summary offense of harassment.

We consulted with the victim. The victim had been through public and private hell, ostracized by the football supporters, the school, and his former team-mates. The victim said that he would accept the plea as long as the senior players admitted what they did and took responsibility.

The issue of penetration remained unresolved. The victim maintained that it happened and was found credible by the investigators. The charged juveniles could credibly admit that they held the victim down and poked him with a broom, but never intended to penetrate him or did not believe that they had penetrated him. At the victim’s original request, the District Attorney’s Office had never charged the felony offense involving penetration, so it became a moot point in the plea discussions.

At the end of the day, the charged juveniles agreed to plead guilty to harassment. They admitted that two of the players held the victim down and the third player poked the victim with a broomstick. The charged juveniles admitted that it was their intent to scare the victim. All of these admissions could have been made at the beginning of the investigation.

The debate was whether to remain totally silent on the nature of the poking, to say “below the waist,” or to say “in the leg.” The defendants initially refused any mention of the broomstick. However, they then admitted the broomstick and requested the “in the leg” language. As in many plea agreements, neither side gets exactly what they want.

The victim was consulted. He agreed that the pleas to harassment and the stated facts in support of the plea were sufficient. The judge overseeing the case accepted the guilty pleas.

In conclusion, to answer the outstanding questions from the case:

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

37

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

1. Did “No Gay Thursdays” happen as a regular hazing ritual with the Conestoga High School football team? Yes, as confirmed by the football players and the School District’s internal investigation.

2. Was the locker room generally unsupervised, allowing “No Gay Thursdays” to continue? Yes, as confirmed by the coaches, players, and the School District’s internal investigation.

3. Did two larger senior players hold the victim down as part of “No Gay Thursdays”? Yes, as stated by the victim, as confirmed by other players, and as admitted by the charged juveniles.

4. Did one of the charged juveniles poke the victim with a broomstick in the lower half of the victim’s body while the victim was being held down by two larger and older players? Yes, as stated by the victim, confirmed by other team members, and as admitted by the charged juveniles. What would you think if you walked in and saw that being done to your son? What would you think if it was done to your daughter?

5. Did the broomstick penetrate the victim? The victim says yes. And only he would know.

6. Partially as a result of this case, was Pennsylvania law amended to make the offense of hazing applicable to high schools? Yes. And we understand that the new Conestoga football coach is doing an excellent job of both coaching and supervising the student-athletes, making sure that no more hazing takes place.

7. Have the charged juveniles and the victim been punished appropriately in the criminal justice system?

The District Attorney’s Office believes that they have been punished appropriately. They all were juveniles when the conduct happened. The victim admitted his role in the cyber-bullying. The charged juveniles admitted their roles in the hazing. All of their charges were kept in the juvenile system. Having accepted responsibility, they all deserve to be left in peace to continue with their lives.

These cases are difficult on a victim, the accused juveniles, and the community. Because these cases involve some nuances and judgment calls, such cases are difficult for anybody outside of the criminal justice world to decipher. They cannot be reduced to one line or one paragraph. Anybody reviewing hazing prosecutions from across the United States would see the same welter of confusing circumstances and mixed emotions within the community, as well as the historically difficult nature of hazing prosecutions.

At the end of the day, the prosecutors, detectives, defense lawyers, and the court all did their jobs in this case with integrity and fairness. The School District, victim, convicted players, students, and community all must deal with the consequences of this case and the other Conestoga cases. As with all criminal justice matters, we seek the truth, which is not always pretty and is seldom neat and orderly.

Chester County remains one of the best and safest places to live, work, raise a family, and get an education in the United States. That is in no small part because we take criminal issues seriously, try to protect victims (especially children and other vulnerable victims), and prevent criminal activity from taking root. Our schools and our communities play a vital role in that equation. We are proud to stand on this record of integrity.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

38

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

The Chester County District Attorney’s Office District Attorney Tom Hogan First Assistant District Attorney Michael Noone Chief of Detectives Kevin Dykes Lieutenant of Detectives Michael McGinnis

Be sure to read blog post: Mr. Hogan in defense of Mr. Hogan. Seeing Red.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

39

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

Epilogue

Epilogue: Here is my conclusion about the 2016 Conestoga football scandal.

Chester County District Attorney Tom Hogan never made the whole truth clear in this case. The records were neatly sealed and secret, and he alone controlled the narrative. Even when he ‘broke the seal’ in a dramatic attempt to defend his office, he did not produce one piece of data – not one scan of one transcript – that justified his massive prosecution. Mr. Hogan went into Conestoga to investigate a sexual assault. But there had been no sexual assault. So, we watched him shift the focus to hazing, quite possibly for his own political gain. Under any other circumstances, a hazing problem would have been handled by the school as an internal matter.

Instead, Mr. Hogan used Conestoga to prosecute a “hazing case” – in the court of public opinion - to the full extent of a law that did not even exist in March 2016. Mr. Hogan was never compelled to describe the hazing problem in terms of extent and severity. He should have disclosed that not one Conestoga football player, parent, teacher, guidance counselor or administrator, student, fan or other person notified the head football coach or even implied that any player had been touched or hurt or felt troubled, angry, fearful or humiliated by hazing or other patterns of negative behavior by players in or out of the locker room. Instead, Mr. Hogan led the public to believe that sexual assault was just one symptom of a horrible yearslong culture of bullying and ritual hazing at Conestoga, about which the coaches “must have known.” He had over-reached on the sexual assault allegation. There is every reason to believe he over-reached on the broader hazing allegation too. He never stopped slandering the citizens whom he was elected to serve.

Be sure to read related blog posts for some surprising new insights.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

40

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

Bibliography 101. Rellahan, Michael. (2015, November 17). Victim in sexting cases gets protection under new law. Retrieved from URL http://www.dailylocal.com/article/DL/20151117/NEWS/151119760 ** This link is no longer active. A transcript of the article is on file.

102. Uncredited. (2015, November 3). Police charge 3 students with sending sexually explicit images. Retrieved from URL http://6abc.com/news/police-3-students-sent-sexually-explicit-images/1066133/

103. Uncredited. (2015, November 12). 4th Arrest Made in Alleged Cyber Bullying and Sexting Case. Retrieved from URL http://www.fox29.com/news/4th-arrest-made-in-alleged-cyber-bullying-and-sexting-case

104. AP. (2015, November 13). Prosecutors charge 4th boy in Pa. school sexting case. Retrieved from URL https://www.yorkdispatch.com/story/news/2015/11/13/prosecutors-charge-4th-boy-pa-school-sextingcase/75784922/

201. Uncredited (2016, Feb). Hazing allegations brought against football team. Retrieved from URL http://spoke.news/hazing-allegations-brought-against-football-team/

202. Hunter, Walt. (2016, February 5). Authorities Investigating Alleged Hazing Incidents At Chester County High School. Retrieved from URL http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2016/02/05/authorities-investigating-allegedhazing-incidents-at-chester-county-high-school/ Plus Video

203. Rubinkam, Michael. (2016, March 4). 3 seniors charged with hazing freshman on ‘No Gay Thursday’. Retrieved from URL https://apnews.com/d448b59f7b7b4c408982a0a9ac5fc732

204. Gish, Jere. (2016, March 4). Pennsylvania teen assaulted as part of "No Gay Thursday" hazing, DA reports. Retrieved from URL http://www.wgal.com/article/pennsylvania-teen-assaulted-as-part-of-no-gaythursday-hazing-da-reports/5966436

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

41

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

205. NBC10 Staff. (2016, March 4). Football Players Accused of Sodomizing Teammate With Broomstick.

Retrieved from URL https://www.necn.com/news/national-international/Conestoga-High-School-Football-HazingTom-Hogan-371039781.html

206. Harris, Chris. (2016 March 7). Police: Three High School Seniors Allegedly Forced Broomstick into Freshman Student's Anus. Retrieved from URL http://people.com/celebrity/pennsylvania-high-schoolers-chargedin-2015-hazing-incident/

207. Macur, Juliet. (2016, March 14). Something Is Missing in High School Hazing Stories: Adults. Retrieved from URL https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/15/sports/high-school-hazing-where-are-the-adults.html

209. Cooperstein, Paige. (2016, March 4). Three charged in 'No-Gay Thursdays' hazing at ChesCo school. Retrieved from URL http://www.epgn.com/news/local/10120-three-charged-in-no-gay-thursdays-hazingat-chesco-school

212. Tampone, Kevin. (2016, March 4).

High school football players assault teammate in 'No Gay Thursday' hazing. Retrieved from URL http://www.syracuse.com/usnews/index.ssf/2016/03/conestoga_high_school_hazing.html

214. Bond, Michaelle. (2016, March 5). ‘No-Gay Thursday:’ Horrid abuse alleged at Conestoga. “The Philadelphia Inquirer”, Philadelphia PA. Page A01

215. Uncredited. (2016, March 4). Three high school football players charged for assault with broomstick.

Retrieved from URL http://abc13.com/news/3-high-school-football-players-charged-for-assault-withbroomstick/1231961/

216. Tharret, Matthew. (2016, March 4). Varsity Football Players Charged With Raping Teammate On “No Gay Thursday”. Retrieved from URL http://www.newnownext.com/varsity-football-players-charged-with-rapingteammate-on-no-gay-thursday/03/2016/

217. Cuellar, Dann. (2016, March 6). DA: 3 football players charged for assault with broomstick. Retrieved from URL http://abc7chicago.com/education/da-3-football-players-charged-for-assault-with-broomstick/1233534/

301. [Names redacted]. (2016, May 4). The Spoke: Choosing Sides. Volume 66, No. 6. Retrieved from URL https://issuu.com/stoganews/docs/page_28_rev *Author’s Note: Some excellent reporting on this matter was written in 2016 by two student reporters from Spoke.news and The Spoke, the Conestoga student news outlets. The reporters’ names are redacted in an abundance of caution, since they may have been minors at the time of their report.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

42

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

315. Bond, Michaelle. (2016, April 3). Parents question Conestoga hazing - The facts don't add up, many said at a meeting. Three senior football players face misdemeanor charges. “The Philadelphia Inquirer,” Philadelphia PA. Page B01 401. Kashatus, William C. (2016, March 17). Criminalize hazing in Pennsylvania’s middle and high schools. Retrieved from URL http://www.historylive.net/op-eds-bill-kashatus/criminalize-hazing-inpennsylvanias-middle-and-high-schools/

402. Bond, Michaelle. (2016, March 14). 'Glaring omission': State anti-hazing laws don't apply to high schools.

“The Philadelphia Inquirer.” Philadelphia PA. Page B01.

403. Bond, Michaelle. (2016, July 23). New Pa. anti-hazing law targets middle and high school students. “The Philadelphia Inquirer.” Philadelphia PA. Page B04.

501. Farence, Adam. (2016, July 13). Investigator: Boy expelled in sexting incident at Conestoga High School actually lives in Chester. Retrieved from URL http://www.delcotimes.com/article/DC/20160713/NEWS/160719846?clearUserState=true ** This link is no longer active. A transcript of the article is on file.

502*. [Names redacted]. (2016, July 26). Sodomy allegation followed victim’s residency dispute with TESD. Retrieved from URL http://spoke.news/sodomy-allegation-followed-victims-residency-dispute-with-tesd/ *Author’s Note: Some excellent reporting on this matter was written in 2016 by two student reporters from Spoke.news and The Spoke, the Conestoga student news outlets. The reporters’ names are redacted in an abundance of caution, since they may have been minors at the time of their report.

503. Farence, Adam. (2016, August 2). Alleged Conestoga High School hazing victim discusses incident. Retrieved from URL http://www.dailylocal.com/article/DL/20160802/NEWS/160809953 ** This link is no longer active. A transcript of the article is on file.

504. Farence, Adam. (2016, August 19). Court rules in favor of the alleged hazing victim; judge rules student was legal resident of T/ESD. Retrieved from URL http://www.mainlinemedianews.com/mainlinesuburbanlife/news/chttp://www.mainlinemedianews.com/mainlin esuburbanlife/news/court-rules-in-favor-of-the-alleged-hazing-victim-judge/articleourt-rules-in-favor-of-thealleged-hazing-victim-judge/article_c3509cc6-9311-550d-b0ac-50f80df16d1d.html

505. Farence, Adam. (2016, August 18).

Defendant’s father challenges Chester County D.A. over Conestoga High School hazing case. Retrieved from URL http://www.phoenixvillenews.com/article/PV/20160817/NEWS/160819955 ** This link is no longer active. A transcript of the article is on file.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

43

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

601. Uncredited. (2017, January 3). Conestoga High School hazing incident settled on lesser charges. Retrieved from URL http://6abc.com/news/conestoga-hazing-incident-settled-on-lesser-charges/1684004/

602. Farence, Adam. (2017, January 3; Updated on January 4). Update: 3 Conestoga football players admit to harassment, no mention of sodomy claim. Retrieved from URL http://www.dailylocal.com/general-news/20170103/update-3-conestoga-football-players-admit-to-harassmentno-mention-of-sodomy-claim

603. Uncredited. (2017, January 3). Football players settle hazing case over ‘No Gay Thursday’. Retrieved from URL http://www.delgazette.com/wire/national-wire/44564/football-players-settle-hazing-case-over-no-gaythursday-2 ** This link is no longer functional. A transcript of the article is available upon request.

604. Lieberman, Eric. (2017, January 3). High Schoolers Charged With Harassment For Hazing Ritual Called ‘No Gay Thursday’. Retrieved from URL http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/03/high-schoolers-charged-with-harassmentfor-hazing-ritual-called-no-gay-thursday/

605. O’Halloran, Caroline. (2017, January 3). Stoga football hazing scandal settled: Players admit to harassment, nothing more. Retrieved from URL http://savvymainline.com/2017/01/03/stoga-football-hazing-scandal-settledplayers-admit-harrassment-nothing/

606. Luciew, John. (2017, January 4). Pa. high school football hazing with broomstick ends in player guilty pleas.

Retrieved from URL http://www.pennlive.com/news/2017/01/pa_high_school_football_hazing.html

607. Kopp, John. (2017, January 12). 'No Gay Thursday' victim: Conestoga football coaches, district enabled 'sexual hazing'. The teen's father has filed a federal lawsuit against the Tredyffrin-Easttown School District. Retrieved from URL http://www.phillyvoice.com/no-gay-thursday-victim-conestoga-football-coachesdistrict-enabled-sexual-hazing/

608. Kopp, John. (2017, January 3). Conestoga football players admit harassment in 'No Gay Thursday' hazing incident. Retrieved from URL http://www.phillyvoice.com/former-conestoga-football-players-plead-guiltyharassment-no-gay-thursday-hazing-incident/

609. Newhouse, Sam. (2017, January 3). Rape allegations against Conestoga High School football players dropped. Retrieved from URL https://www.metro.us/philadelphia/broomstick-rape-allegations-againstconestoga-football-players-dropped/zsJqac---hJbDPE6VoHVas

610. Benshoff, Laura. (2017, January 3). A high-profile hazing investigation at Conestoga High ends quietly [updated]. Retrieved from URL https://whyy.org/articles/a-high-profile-hazing-investigation-at-conestoga-highends-quietly/

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

44

Note to the Reader: The events described in this summary have been taken from actual media reports, many of which contain direct quotes by the officials involved. Some identifying details have been omitted to protect the privacy of individuals. Any statement or concept not specifically cited with an external source is summary, experiential or opinion. The experience and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

611. AP. (2017, March 3). Football players settle hazing case over ‘No Gay Thursday’. Retrieved from URL https://www.boston.com/sports/high-school-sports/2017/01/03/football-players-settle-hazing-case-overno-gay-thursday 612. Bond, Michaelle. (2017, January 3 updated January 4). Conestoga football players admit hazing — not more-serious allegations. Retrieved from URL http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20170104_Conestoga_football_players_admit_hazing_--_not_moreserious_allegation.html

613. Fitzgerald, Michael. (2017, January 4). HS Football Players Who Sexually Assaulted Teammate on ‘No Gay Thursday’ Settle Case In Plea Deal. Retrieved from URL http://www.towleroad.com/2017/01/no-gay-thursday-2/

614. Gremore, Graham. (2017, January 6). Three football players admit to hazing younger player in horrific “No Gay Thursday” attack. Retrieved from URL https://www.queerty.com/three-football-players-admit-hazing-younger-player-horrific-no-gay-thursday-attack20170106

615. (Name Redacted). (2017, February 14.) year-long controversy. The Spoke Volume 67 No. 4. *Author’s Note: Some excellent reporting on this matter was written in 2016 by two student reporters from Spoke.news and The Spoke, the Conestoga student news outlets. The reporters’ names are redacted in an abundance of caution, since they may have been minors at the time of their report.

703. Polaneczky, Ronnie. (2017, May 18). Conestoga sodomy lie still doing harm. “The Philadelphia Inquirer.”

Philadelphia PA. Page B01

801. (2017, June 29.) Official Website of the District Attorney of Chester County. Retrieved from URL https://www.chesco.org/1441/District-Attorney

901. Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence. Protection Sexual Violence and Intimidation. http://www.pcadv.org/Learn-More/Domestic-Violence-Topics/Protection-From-Sexual-Violence/#SpotID_15747

902. Title: 18: Crimes and Offenses. Chapter 31: Sexual Offenses. http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/CT/HTM/18/00.031..HTM

904. Shakespeare, William. Henry The Sixth, Part 2 Act 4, scene 2.

Related Blog Posts

Return Home

45