Rick Belden watches an interview with Jon Ritchie, childhood friend of Jerry Sandusky, and knows only too well what Jon describes.
I’ll be honest. Up until a day or so ago, I really hadn’t been paying close attention to the Penn State story. As an adult survivor of childhood abuse, I’m living and dealing with my own story every day. I don’t have to look to media for more.
I’ll be honest about something else, too. Just 24 hours ago, I’d never heard of Jon Ritchie. Then, yesterday afternoon, I happened to be channel flipping and ran across his conversation above with Bob Ley on the ESPN show Outside the Lines. Now Jon Ritchie is one of my favorite men. If you watch the video above, I think you’ll see why.
Jon speaks of his long history with Jerry Sandusky, a man he regarded as a role model, friend, and mentor from the time of their first meeting when Ritchie was 14 and Sandusky was recruiting him for the Penn State football program. Speaking about Sandusky, Jon says:
“I just felt like this man was so selfless, and so egoless, that he was what I aspired to be someday. And now, that foundation of what I thought was credible, and what I thought was important, and what I thought was good has crumbled. It’s decimated and it’s caused me to just reevaluate everything around me.”
A bit later, he says, “My whole lens has cracked.”
♦◊♦
I understand exactly what Jon is saying because I’ve had a similar experience. Several years ago, I learned that an older man I’d known and admired my entire life, someone I’d loved and respected, someone with whom I’d spent countless hours as a child, had systematically sexually abused at least a dozen children over a period of around 25 years.
I was completely blindsided. I felt as if my entire world had been turned upside down. I’d never had any indication, not as a child and not as an adult, that anything so hideous was going on. He was, in my perception, one of the safest adults I knew as a child. I’d never received any inappropriate attention from him or heard of anyone else who had.
Shock is a far, far too mild a word for what I felt and experienced in response to these revelations. As Jon says in the video, what I’d learned caused me to reevaluate everything. Not just my relationship with this man I’d trusted so much, my memories of my time with him, and my feelings about him, but everything. My sense of what I thought I knew and who I thought I could trust was ruptured down to the very root.
I was horribly disoriented for weeks, and it took a long time for me to come to terms with what I’d learned and to right myself again. Furthermore, I was unprepared to find that someone else I’d known and trusted all my life would do anything to protect this serial abuser’s reputation as a “great man”, to deny, to cover up, and to press his victims to keep the secret. This, to me, has been as appalling as the abuse itself, and has poisoned my relationship with that person as well.
♦◊♦
Perhaps that’s why I’m so impressed with Jon Ritchie today. He could’ve taken the route of protecting, denying, and rationalizing on behalf of his long-time hero, or he could’ve simply stayed out of sight and kept quiet until things settled down. Instead he’s chosen to take the path of honor and integrity, to allow others to witness his walk through the flames.
I can see the deep pain in his eyes as he speaks, and I know it all too well. He’s obviously been shaken to the core. It’s not easy to accept that someone so close and so admired has done such awful things, much less to speak publicly about it so soon after finding out. Jon is sharing what is surely one of the most devastating experiences of his life in real time and in an incredibly transparent way.
The children who were molested and assaulted are the primary victims here, and that is where, as Jon says, the focus belongs. But Jon and others like him, who were close with Jerry Sandusky and saw him as a mentor, a hero, a role model, and a good man, are part of the collateral damage, secondary victims who’ve been deeply wounded by a horrific betrayal of trust and confidence that cuts to the bone and warps one’s sense of reality.
♦◊♦
These men are in crisis, too. They’re feeling crazy, wondering how they could’ve been so thoroughly fooled for so long, and worrying that they somehow failed to pay sufficient attention to realize what was going on and stop it. They’re searching their own memories, wondering if maybe something happened to them as well, something they’ve somehow blocked out or rationalized away. Some are thinking they’re damn lucky it wasn’t them, and feeling guilty about the relief that comes with that. They’ve all been damaged and injured, too, certainly not in the same ways or to the same degree as the children who were molested and assaulted, but in ways that still matter deeply, and they’re going to need compassion, understanding, and time to heal as well.
If I could thank Jon in person for this brave, honest, articulate, and very moving interview, I would. I hope it’s widely seen and discussed. It’s an incredibly helpful, vital part of the conversation for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is that, even in what must be one of the darkest moments of his life, Jon Ritchie is still showing us what it means to be a good man.
–
About Rick Belden
It is interesting to study the reactions of people close to the main protagonists, as the PSU saga unfolds. Confusion, doubt, anger, straining for words like “Monster”, and having to say them in a way that still shown open disbelief that the word is the right one to use.
Is such disbelief warranted?
I believe that it is!
So many think they know what “Evil” looks like, especially when it comes to kids. The book and film “Little Children” gave people a nice stereotype, archetype, an image to grasp onto. Evil looks weird – scrawny – emaciated. Evil is socially inadequate – lives with it’s mother long after it should have flown the nest. Evil is easy to spot when it looks like that.
Here is a quote for comparison:
““I believe I live a good part of my life in a make-believe world. I enjoyed pretending as a kid, and I love doing the same as an adult with these kids. Pretending has always been a part of me. I’ve loved trying to do the right things to hopefully make a difference in kids’ lives and maybe make things better off for them. I am tough and competitive with the kids, but the one thing that has never been pretend or make-believe about me is my genuine love and care for the kids. I’ve always wanted to be accountable and trustworthy to them.”
Anything in there look Evil? Any Alarm Bells Ringing?
That is from the Autobiography of a Jerry Sandusky (2000) – the book is titled “Touched”.
Make-believe?
It seems that the make-believe was so complete that accountability and trustworthiness were redefined in a form that has to now be accounted for with the trust of 12 good men and true. So far, a Grand Jury have made it clear that they did not agree with the make-believe and that Trustworthy and Accountable need to be checked and verified against Legal and Social norms.
There has been no Cracking Of The Lens. None!
There has been smoke and mirrors. A player on the stage of life has portrayed themselves with consummate skill and acted out a great performance. In fact, they are still acting out that role – it’s all just make-believe after all.
Where The Lens has not been used, is when it should have brought clear sight and clarity when the smoke and mirrors failed – when for just a few moments they did not cover up what was behind them. It is becoming clearer that there was not just one occasion when that happened, there were many. That was because some believed they knew the ways that people work, and they failed to call in experts who deal with the reality of those who abuse. That occurred at PSU and else where too. It is not surprising that motion in the right direction only occurred when a report was made to the right people.
The reason that so many express confusion is because they have A Conscience and struggle to comprehend that which they see as Unconscionable. It’s that “Un” prefix that is a big issue here. It keeps getting used, such as “Unbelievable”. People can’t believe because they are trapped by their own morality and conscience. They can’t imagine that anything exists outside of that framework – that there is anything outside of The Box.
Lack of Conscience or Guiltlessness was first recognized by psychiatry as far back as 1806 and the work of Philippe Pinel. This condition of missing conscience is called by other names, too, most often “sociopathy,”
“… but the one thing that has never been pretend or make-believe about me is my genuine love and care for the kids. I’ve always wanted to be accountable and trustworthy to them.”
There is a police tape of two conversations between a mother and a person she suspected of acts that people find abhorrent. It’s in Grand Jury Testimony. It is indicated that forgiveness was sought, accountability admitted and remorse expressed, up to and including comments such as “I understand. I was wrong. I wish I could get forgiveness. I know I won’t get it from you. I wish I were dead.”.
But, when there is no conscience do those words have meaning? Or, are they just a ploy – an emotionally manipulative tactic – used in an attempt to blunt the responses of people who do have A Conscience? Are the words about Confession or Control?
It’s an attempt to construct a Box to contain others reactions, so that play outside of The Box can continue where no Rule Book applies. In that case it succeeded.
It is even reported that it left a foul taste in the mouth of the DA who ended up not prosecuting. One wonders at the content of a PSU police report, 30 pages long, and if the rules that were questioned as being broken were just ignored, because the people writing the report believed they had to make it all fit inside The Box that they lived in, The Morality and Conscience they live by?
Does saying Sorry have any meaning when there is No Conscience?
Does saying I have learned my lesson have meaning?
People who have no conscience don’t tell lies. That’s right – They DON’T tell lies.
To them there is no difference between truth or lie. They can say what they like – and will do so. For them what most people would call a lie is just a way to control another person who believes it is true. There is no shame of guilt involved. Shame and Guilt requires A Conscience.
They simply say what best empowers them, what gives them control.
They also are able to express emotional conduct that is not true emotion. It’s sham – It’s play acting. They can even be seen sobbing, tears streaming down their faces, noses running as they tell others that they know what they have done is wrong – that they know they have a problem – that they know they need help – and even get people with real emotions and a conscience to agree to act and help.
How does a person with conscience react to such a display? Remorse is implied, but is it real? No!
The term Grooming has been about for some time, and so many think it applies only to children and sexual predation. Grooming follows certain patterns and it can be applied to The Grooming and Control of adults as well.
There are known cases where such people without conscience have beguiled others into supposedly acting as that conscience and watching to make sure they don’t do the Unconscionable again. They get friends, family members and colleagues to take on this role and quite literally these people who believe they are doing the right thing end up enslaved.
What do you do when you find that your own Conscience has been enslaved to not control but empower a person with No Conscience?
You are fighting to keep them in The Box that the other person does not even recognize as existing. You fight to get the other person to follow The Rule Book, but not one word in that Rule Book applies to the person who can do anything they want because they have no conscience – no limits.
There you are with your Rule Book and Box, and even a lifetime of experience of using both to take kids and make them supposedly better people. You have encountered some kids who were off the rails, and you used The Box and the Rule Box and some Tough Love to get them on the straight and narrow – and you are applying the same tactics to a grown man. You expect the same outcome. It has always worked before, so it will work this time – or so you convince yourself.
It’s like being a fly in a spiders web, you are caught and stuck. Confusion reigns and you all too often find that there is no way out. When there is a group of people involved they attempt to come to a consensus about how to escape and get out, and that just leads to more confusion and procrastination. They all end up compromised. The Rule book and Box blind them to the limits which this person simply goes beyond.
How do you as an individual or a group control something that is uncontrollable – something that has no limits?
You find yourself emotionally, socially and even professionally compromised and you still can’t understand why the person is not following the Rule Book and staying inside The Box. You can even start to convince yourself that this person is now Boxed and Governed by the Rule Book, and that just blinds you to any break out or infringement of the rules.
It also allows the person with No Conscience to figure out how to play along and make sure you are not aware of behavior that you believe is under control. They may even dance on the edges of The Box and then act as if they are inside the box as a tactic to keep people convinced that they are still controlling some one who in fact has not limits.
Taking away a locker room key to enforce the Rule Book only tells the person that they need to find another venue, such as a school gym, somewhere out of town, and even behind the closed doors of their own home.
You have Friends, Family and Close Colleagues all trying to figure it out and make sense, and they can’t because the one thing they can’t see is Lack of Conscience. The game is played out, the right reactions are performed by the person with no conscience. The performance can be totally convincing. The group are convinced that the person does have A Conscience, and yet they can’t imagine what it is like to be without one. They have all become Jailed by what they believe is reality, and they are in so deep that they can’t or won’t call for help. Why would they need to call anyway? They have a Box and a Rule Book and the actor just plays along convincing them that it is working.
For many that will be seen as an excuse for some acting in ways that are to so many incomprehensible. To others it will not be an excuse, because these very issues have been known about from past events, and that is why there is a Rule Book, Local and Federal law, that tells you who to call when you know or suspect child abuse. That is so that experts can deal not only with the child, but the person who has no Rule Book and who lives in a landscape that has No Box – No Barriers.
So many will be confused in reading “I’ve always wanted to be accountable and trustworthy to them.”. They are attempting to evaluate it all from the position of their own conscience, and they simply can’t grasp what it is like to not have that little angel sitting on your shoulder. That little voice of reason. Some will even try to see it as there just being a little devil that says “Do It! Do It!”, But that is also a mistake.
There is no voice saying one thing or the other. There is no anchor in any form, and that is why the person can simply step outside of The Box and ignore all Rule Books – they simply do not apply to this person – there are no limits or restraints – None!
So many simply can’t grasp what it is like to be able to write”I’ve always wanted to be accountable and trustworthy to them.” and for there to be absolutely no meaning!
They are just a sham – smoke and mirrors – beguiling words to convince others you are like them, that values are shared and that the person writing shares their conscience and morality. The words are meaningless to the person who has no limits. Except where they fool others.
In 1998 there was concern and suspicion and by 2000 it was reading very differently in an autobiography which I’m sure many read and wished to believe. By 2002 it would be believed, so when confronted with a challenge to reality, which reality prevailed? The reality of The Rule Book, Conscience and Box?
The lens is “NOT” Cracked!
People should not buy into the idea that it is them that have defective vision! To do that is to be played and used. You all too often end up trying to explain away the supposedly incomprehensible so that many remain confused and blinded. It’s a tactic that has already been used with great success, and as any good Coach knows, when you can figure out the other players tactics you turn them to your own advantage.
The Lens just needs to be focused on the details and gaps in the smoke and mirrors where clarity, however bizarre or uncomfortable, does exist.
Inside the Mind of a Sociopath – “Imagine – if you can – not having a conscience, none at all, …..”.
http://www.cix.co.uk/~klockstone/spath.htm
I think this speaks to the way people think about sexual abusers. People assume they are monsters. People assume there are tell-tale signs that this man or that woman will hurt a kid. But it rarely happens like that. The majority of people who abuse children are no different than the rest of us. They are the guy who opens up a center for at-risk boys. They are the mother who carpools all the kids to their sports practices. They are the babysitter who sometimes watches your kids for free. The aunt who always sends gifts. The uncle who offers to pay for his nephew’s college tuition.
I do not think it is so much that these people fooled everyone as it is that there are two sides to them. That makes it particularly difficult because often times these people do not abuse every child they come across. I am sure that there are boys that Sandusky helped out of a genuine concern for them. There may be boys that Sandusky thought about abusing but changed his mind. There may even be boys he stopped abusing because he saw it did to them.
Things are not as simple as we like them to be. Sometimes good people do bad things, and sometimes bad people do good things.
Like so many others, this recent tragedy at Penn State saddens me. It saddens me most to learn so many more young people are added to the uncountable list of those damaged by sexual abuse. I am a member of that list.
Yet, as a psychoanalyst, it also saddens me because it (once again) demonstrates the prevailing lack of understanding of the social and psychological complexity of this issue. Most of what we seem to do is reduce this problem to a split between “good” and “bad” people, of “whether or not they have a conscience,” and of how to best “ferret them out and punish them,” rather an acknowledging just how pervasive and embedded this problem is in the entire psycho sexual fabric of our society. For example, CNN recently put on a program about sexual predators “not being punished,” and “being allowed to live” in our neighborhoods. Nothing was reported on why this problem exists and why the offenders (politicians, priests, coaches, teachers, and, yes, family members) behave as they do. Simplistic programs like that only serve to inflame public outrage and do nothing to promote an approach to understanding the problem. Why are we not more curious about what it is in the psychological emotional makeup of an individual that would make him (or her) sexually attracted to a child?
I like to think that even if I wasn’t a psychoanalyst, I would at least be curious about such a strange mental preoccupation. A “peculiar” obsession, that could, if acted upon, potentially risk the loss of family, career, reputation, and spending years in jail.
In these moments of outrage, why do we seem “forget” and not address the fact that the pornography industry is one of the most profitable businesses in most countries? Americans alone spend 10 billion dollars a year on pornography.
Why don’t we know that (over ten years ago) there were 372 million pornographic Web pages, 2.5 billion pornographic emails sent, 100 thousand Web sites offering illegal child pornography, and, at last count, 72 million annual visitors to pornographic websites? Why do we also forget, or “not know” that 70% of 18 to 24 year old males visit porn sites in a typical month, and 66% of men in their 20s and 30s report being regular users of pornography? Or do we not know that 75% of people at work have “accidentally” visited a pornographic website, and 15% have visited such sites more than 10 times at work? What’s more, in any given month, at least 50% of priests, pastors, and ministers (male and female) visit at least one pornographic website.
Should we only blame and lament the deplorable behavior of child abusers, simply punish those who are caught, crack down on the pornography industry, the Internet, hotel and home access to pornography, or try to understand why pornography is so pervasive and supported by and profited from, not a minority, but a majority of “normal” people and industries?
If there is a “cracked lens” it is less in the eye of the individual, but in our society as a whole. Why is that?
If we want to prevent and find ways cure a problem, we have to first understand why it exists.
“As betrayal strains the logical viewing of how the world works and the logical assumptions on which relationships are built, it throws the person experiencing it into an illogical mode where nothing fits – an inexpressible, altered state.” ~ Caryl Gopfert, 1999, dissertation: “Student Experiences of Betrayal in the Zen Buddhist Teacher/Student Relationship.”
That is a wonderful quote that goes right to the heart of what I was trying to say with this article. Thank you.