Who impersonated Vitte Jr.

Phone call placed to Sandusky County Prosecutor Tom Stierwalt wasn't trooper
Jan 26, 2014


Attorney Dean Henry said he will ask for an investigation to determine who called Sandusky County Prosecutor Tom Stierwalt pretending to be Henry's client, trooper Ricky Vitte Jr.

Click here to listen to the call (includes objectionable language)

Vitte was being investigated for allegedly watching porn and masturbating with a pre-teen boy. Henry called the allegations false and said his clent is innocent, but Stierwalt said Jan. 17 he declined to seek charges mainly because he didn't think he could get a conviction. Vitte could argue an affirmative defense contending he was teaching the boy to masturbate, Stierwalt said.

The investigation was closed Jan. 10, suggesting the time that's elapsed since the incidents took place — about five years ago — and the lack of any physical evidence were the reasons Stierwalt's office declined to pursue a charge.

Stierwalt hasn't confirmed it's him in the recording taking the call, which appears to have been placed to Stierwalt on Jan. 22, but Henry said Stierwalt confirmed it to him.

“He told me,” Henry said, which is the protocol if a criminal suspect who has an attorney contacts a prosecutor or other court official.

Henry subsequently determined it wasn't Vitte who placed the call to Stierwalt, but someone who knows the trooper.

“Theres no question in my mind that the individual that called Tom Stierwalt's office and pretended to be my client knows who my client is,” Henry said. “This is not just some stranger that just called and said 'Hey I'm going to try to pull this off.'”

Henry said he spoke with Stierwalt prior to the decision not to seek an indictment, but notations of that conference, or any notes of conversations with Henry, weren't included with documents released by Stierwalt previously in response to a public records request from the Register.  

Stierwalt has declined to reply to written questions or respond to followup telephone messages left for him from the Register. 

 "I'm not sure what we can do, except ignore it," the person who appears to be Stierwalt tells the caller he thinks is Vitte Jr., after the caller asks for advice how to respond to the attention that's been drawn to the investigation. 



I thought it was centauri. his comments kinda disappeared for a day or two. had me worried.


Yes Mikey, Cent has been very busy, having a mental break down. He confessed Saturday night that he was Elsebeth Baumgartners number 1 fan. (see comment section of the Homosexuality story)

He also told us he is a target of assassination, has threats against himself and his family, been falsely arrested, he is in a war with the CIA and the FBI, and last but not least, he is going to expose big PHARMA!

That's a lot for a little man that only knows how to cut and paste links and pretend to be a political activist.

We also learned he is afraid to hang around gay guys because he doesn't want his friends to think HE is gay.

But hey, it was Saturday night, so maybe it was just the Jack Daniels talkin.

Elsebeth says it was just hyperbole.

Julie R.

@DickTracey: So what Homosexuality story was that on that you are referring to?

As for Elsebeth Baumgartner --- I don't know her .... never even knew that much about her until I started reading the SR comments right about the time Kim Nuesse was fired ..... don't know if all the allegations she made were the truth, either .... that is, with the exception of corrupt ERIE COUNTY. I know for a FACT that she sure was right on target there .... and if she was right on target there, what does that tell you about the rest of her allegations?


Dick is trying to discredit posters and drive hit counts on the story "Homosexuality not learned or unlearned, it simply is" by trying to link the story to EB.

In comments there, DT made false allegations that this poster (Babo) is EB; that Babo is impersonating a lawyer; and that EB is subject to probation conditions that prevent her from making statements on the internet.

Centauri posted the public record (Judicial release entry) from Cuyahoga County that proves DT lied about EB's probation conditions and this poster has publicly denied being EB and denied being a lawyer. DT now also has an ax to grind with Centauri, so the usual allegations to discredit come forth.

I think DT hopes that the usual flame wars break out when ever EB is mentioned to drive the hit counts on stories about homosexuality and distract from the larger much more important story that there is a pattern of LE misconduct and cover up of public corruption in this area.

Also, DT may be a person who has a lot to lose if EB is publicly vindicated. He's been very hateful in his attacks on her and her family, indicating it's very personal.


You can call me Dick, I wear the name proudly. But do not ever call me a liar!

Your buddy Centauri made the false statement about your probation!

SAT, 01/25/2014 - 3:27PM
DT, I believe that is was you who posted comments that EB was released last year from prison. I understand that EB is prohibited from posting comments on any newspaper forum.



Dick Tracey 1/25/2014 1:00PM
(replying to Babo claiming Babo is EB)

"Does your probation even allow you to be back on the internet, pretending to be a lawyer?"

Centauri's post is at 3:27PM the same day in reply to your post. He is relying on your earlier false statement (a lie posted in a question) because you had posted a specific detail of EB's release in the past.

Bet you lie about a lot of little things too..like your name



Let me get this straight: Dick Tracey asks if Elsebeth Baumgartner's probation includes some full or partial prohibition of the Internet. Centauri answers that he believes there IS such a condition. And Dick is the liar? Hmmm. Confused again, are we, Babo?


Dean Henry loves this little side show. He thinks it takes the attention of his client, that likes to spank little boys bare butts, abuse and degrade women and masturbate with a twelve year old while showing him porn.

No, Dean we commend the caller and we think your client is a pedophile.

Jakes Dad

Tom, I would use what Dean Henery told Wukie to say. "This is no more than "Sex Education" in this region of the country." I have been told there are many different camps on how this situation can be viewed by Sandusky County Officials. This has seemed to work for other cases.

From the Grave

Several people involved in this are going straight to HELL.


I agree 100% with you, Grave, and the sooner the better society will be, ridding us of the poisonous venom political and government power gives them.


It was Weird Al Yankovich


So who does Dean Henry want to investigate the matter? Certainly not SC LE as they are not qualified and have conflicts of interest. Similarly, the AG's office has conflicts as it filed a grievance on Henry with the Supreme Court and this case confirms Henry never should have been appointed a special prosecutor in the Limberios case.

That leaves the FBI. Please Dean call the FBI and let everyone know it so we can contact the same agent about you!


Well said Babo


I've read with interest the calls on this board for criminal prosecution of Vitte regarding the activities with the boy and the movie.

There seem to be plenty of people on here who claim knowledge of Ohio's criminal statutes, so this should be an easy one for them.

My question: What section(s) of the Ohio Revised Code should Vitte be charged with violating?


So are you suggesting he has an affirmative defense in that he is a parent guardian teacher etc? If that's the case he should be charged with Child endangering. http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2919.22

Also there's that small problem of fleeing the police at excessive speed. http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2921.331.


Break it down for me. What part of the child endangering statute could he be convicted of?


Would appear as though you are reaching for a public comments section to either one come up with charges (which would be Tom's job) or come up with a defense (which is Dean's job). Either way would it not make more sense to have a grand jury hear the case and determine the outcome? There are multiple charges that are being overlooked. Would you want Ricky Vitte Jr. watching a movie with your children or married to your daughter (that is of course if you have children).


Why don't you state what you believe to be his basis for the affirmative defense to a charge of disseminating or production of material harmful to a juvenile first?

I made it easy for you. Take us through the affirmative defenses for each crime and explain how Vitte meets the criteria for an affirmative defense.

(B) The following are affirmative defenses to a charge under this section that involves material or a performance that is harmful to juveniles but not obscene:

(1) The defendant is the parent, guardian, or spouse of the juvenile involved.

Is Vitte a parent, guardian or spouse of the 12 year old boy? No?

(2) The juvenile involved, at the time of the conduct in question, was accompanied by the juvenile's parent or guardian who, with knowledge of its character, consented to the material or performance being furnished or presented to the juvenile.

Was the parent, or guardian present and gave permission? No?

(3) The juvenile exhibited to the defendant or to the defendant's agent or employee a draft card, driver's license, birth record, marriage license, or other official or apparently official document purporting to show that the juvenile was eighteen years of age or over or married, and the person to whom that document was exhibited did not otherwise have reasonable cause to believe that the juvenile was under the age of eighteen and unmarried.

Did the juvenile try to trick Vitte into believing he was 18 years old? No?


(1) It is an affirmative defense to a charge under this section, involving material or a performance that is obscene or harmful to juveniles, that the material or performance was furnished or presented for a bona fide medical, scientific, educational, governmental, judicial, or other proper purpose, by a physician, psychologist, sociologist, scientist, teacher, librarian, clergyman, prosecutor, judge, or other proper person.

(2) Except as provided in division (B)(3) of this section, mistake of age is not a defense to a charge under this section.

Is Vitte, part of a bona fide medical, scientific, educational, governmental, judicial or other proper study of teaching 12 year old boys how to masturbate by exposing their adult male genitalia to the juvenile while watching pornography? Yes or No?

If yes, is it a grant funded peer reviewed study and do you get off by reading these comments?


Well, let's start off with the material that was presented to the kid. Do you know what it was? Do you have it? Can you prove it is obscene or harmful to juveniles? What is your evidence going to be?


LOL, nice try Dean-Rick. Any kind of pornography is deemed obscene if provided to a juvenile that's why they are not allowed to purchase it or view it under federal and state law. And of course masturbating in front of a juvenile is also obscene.

Don't believe me? Try it some time in front of a pre-teen. In fact just try whipping it out in public in front of a pre teen.

So we are back to the Affirmative Defenses what are you raising as your affirmative defense?

And if you don't think these acts are obscene they are at a minimum harmful as any psychologist will tell you.


So admit it, pal. You don't know what the provable demonstrable facts are. I'm glad you're just an anonymous loudmouth on a video screen instead of someone with public responsibility.


So, is he absolutely and categorically denying all allegations or does he have an affirmative defense? I hope I am not the only one who has caught on to this. Sure hope someone with public responsibility can do something to help this child and other children never have to experience this type of situation.


Actually, the child has the right to press charges himself in the Municipal Court with jurisdiction. Maybe some noble attorney may step up to the plate for free and help him with process.

Or someone (a reporter perhaps) could contact State Rep or Senator (can't remember)Teresa Fedor out of Toledo to help. She's very active in child sexual abuse issues.


Everybody but you seems to know the readily provable facts. The facts are what the now 17 year old stated happened (in the police report) and what the ex wife claims Vitte told her. (also in the police report). Those statements are reliable eye witness testimony and an admission against interest (a confession) by Vitte. To those facts you can also infer guilt by Vitte's actions in fleeing the police.

Stierwalt would not raise the issue of affirmative defenses IF there was no case in the first place. In effect that's an admission by Stierwalt that there is a case to present to the grand jury, but his loyalties run to protecting Vitte and not the public.

You need to up your game and moral standards.

So again, Drick, what is the Affirmative defense that you claim prevents a finding of guilty?

Truth or Dare

Gotta love it when folks mention conspiracy theories. As if this country wasn't built upon them, eh?!

Hey Babo; Or anyone interested in taking time to view, Google Youtube; Punch in "Conspiracy of Silence", a past investigation w/first hand testimonies from highly credible people like ex-FBI agent Ted Gunderson. I'm sure viewed as a whack job in the eyes of many. May he R.I.P. Better yet, once on Youtube, just punch in documentaries about pedophile priests, police brutality, whatever, surf and watch away! Oh, wait, why would one want to read/view/learn such things?! Technology, you either love it or hate it. When it reveals truth, I see why those with much to hide and those facilitating their protection hate it.


Thank you. I'm familiar with Gunderson and his work. A good quote is "Conspiracy isn't a theory it's a crime" Author unknown.


Is Stierwalt suggesting it's legal for cops to commit sex acts with children?



To serve & protect innocent citizens while upholding the law must have been [just a suggestion ] or deleted in favor of Hey, I got your back, you got mine when I fall in some -h-t. Besides , it all goes away if you just ignore it , these simple people are just idiots.


Maybe you need to do a voice analysis and compare this call with another call you make to Vitte to determine if it is him calling or not. Or sonething like that.


I haven't seen anybody address a question that I have concerning this particular incident: Is impersonating someone, taping the conversation you have WHILE impersonating someone, and providing that recording the media illegal?

It's been a very long time since I looked at such laws in Ohio, and as I recall, as long as one person knows the conversation is being taped, it's legal (though I don't know if it's legal to release publicly). But that may very well have changed. Still, at least the impersonation part of all of this can't be legal, CAN it? Anybody know for sure?