Late last year, when the now-teenage boy told social workers Vitte twice made him watch adult porn and masturbate with him, Vitte allegedly justified the actions to the boy’s mother, saying he was teaching the boy about sex, O’Connell’s deputy’s report stated.
The woman filed for a civil protection order against Vitte after that conversation, according to court documents. “I am here to obtain a CPO in order to provide protection for my children due to information involving an open case against Ricky Vitte Jr.” she wrote in a petition for the order.
Henry said it’s never been clear to him how the motion for a protection order relates to the masturbation and pornography allegations, despite the fact he was Vitte’s legal representation for both, and the boy’s mother explicitly states the reason in her petition.
After O’Connell completed his investigation, and before Sandusky County prosecutor Tom Stierwalt declined to file charges, Henry conferenced with Stierwalt about the masturbation allegations. During that meeting, they discussed Vitte’s possible defenses, Henry said.
“My client absolutely and categorically and completely denies … all of those allegations” Henry said.
Stierwalt told the Register his main reason for not presenting the case to a grand jury was because Vitte could argue an affirmative defense.
Henry, however, said he did not recall discussing an affirmative defense when he and Stierwalt met to review the allegations.