State Police: No Evidence of Wilton Children Harmed by Von Kohorn

GOOD Morning Wilton reached out to State Police for comment on several questions related to the recent arrest of Eric Von Kohorn, a Wilton preschool aide, on child pornography charges. State Trooper Kelly Grant from the State Police public information office answered the questions in a phone call on Monday afternoon, Aug. 25.

GMW.com:  Regarding one of the charges against Von Kohorn, “promoting a minor in obscene performance” — in Von Kohorn’s case, what does ‘promote’ mean?

Grant: That is passing along the picture or the movie or whatever it is they are viewing. That is forwarding it to somebody else, basically.

The other charge, “Possession of Child pornography in the First degree”—’First Degree’ means more than 50 images. Can you say how many images von Kohorn possessed?

Grant:  I can’t tell you how many images he possessed. That I don’t know, obviously it was over 50.

I’ve read that it could have been a movie, which would count as several.

Grant:  That could be.

What brought Von Kohorn to investigators’ attention?

Grant:  They could have been investigating somebody else and based on what they found it leads them to another person, which leads them to another person, which leads them to a whole group. Usually it’s a group, they have their own network on the internet, members who have a password to get into a website. When you start with one, you open up the group to all of them.

Is that the case with the six who were arrested on Wednesday?

Grant:  Not necessarily.

How long was he under investigation?

Grant:  These investigations take quite some time. There’s no specific time frame.

We’ve heard that Detective Jonathan Carreiro, who is in charge has told the superintendent that Von Kohorn was under investigation beginning in April.

Grant:  I can’t say for sure, but if that’s what they’re being told… Some of these are months-long investigations, some of these are years-long.

A parent has asked me, why–if this involved school children–did investigators wait until June to notify the school if they were aware of his activity in April?

Grant:  We have a responsibility not only to the community, but to the suspect also. We can’t falsely accuse people. That’s why we conduct a thorough investigation to make sure that what we are saying, we are correct in what we are saying. This ruins somebody’s life. He’s done–he’s not going to be able to get a job, he may go to prison, and it’s over for him. If we had come out with this in April saying, ‘We think this is what’s happening,’ and do the investigation and find out it’s not him, whether he’s guilty or innocent, he’s done, he’s guilty. We have to make sure we’re correct to protect everybody involved.

If investigators had any, any, inkling of suspicion that children from Wilton were involved, they would have notified the school immediately; they would not have waited until June. But through their investigation, viewing these photos or whatever it was, they knew that children from this area were not involved, and that there was no immediate danger to any child.

It’s been said by parents and the superintendent that police have told them von Kohorn did not produce any pornographic materials. Given that he was employed by the school since 2007, is there any possibility that Von Kohorn did produce materials involving Wilton students?

Grant:  He did not produce any material, which means he didn’t take any pictures or make any movies himself. Everything he had on his computer, he downloaded from someplace else. He was charged with possession and promoting, not manufacturing.

From everything you know, are investigators sure that nothing involved students from the preschool?

Grant:  Correct.

Is there a way to ‘quantify’ investigator’s certainty to this?

Grant:  Their certainty is based on the investigation. They’re highly qualified and they do a thorough investigation. Everything was downloaded from other websites, as opposed to pictures or movies that he uploaded. Everything was downloaded.

I understand there’s existing software to identify pictures, and based on the investigators’ expertise, that all the photos are “previously known”?

Grant:  As part of their work, the investigators see the same pictures over and over. People share these photos and movies. These photos could be from the 70s and 80s, they don’t have to be new. I’m sure the investigators see these same photos and movies over and over, unfortunately. Because [perpetrators] do share them–they’re constantly sharing them and passing from one person to another.

Von Kohorn’s bond was set at $50,000, compared to a range of $35,000 to $250,000  for the other 5 individuals arrested in the same investigation. Why was von Kohorn’s bond set at this amount?

Grant:  These [arrests] are all from different parts of the state, so they are different courts. There are different sergeants. So it’s either a court set bond, so it’s the judge that makes the decision. In different parts of the state they make their decision based on several things. The same thing with the sergeants–they’re going to make their decision based on whether he’s been charged with this before? Does he have any failures to appear in court? What are some of the other charges or is it their first offense? They take a look at all those things and the bond is determined based on all of that.

I don’t know if these are court set bonds or if a sergeant determined the bond.

What steps have state police suggested that school administrators and officials take to investigate this further on their end?

Grant:  Just because somebody views child pornography doesn’t mean they molest children. It just means that unfortunately this is something that they like to look at. As far as investigating it, especially if the [children] are non-communicative, it’s difficult to find out if it’s happening at the school. But a doctor may be able to know, and parents have to know their children, when something is different about them, attitude-wise, different signs the parents will be able to pick up on.

When we have instances where children are assaulted, we don’t interview them; they’re given a forensic interview by somebody who is trained and qualified to do that type of work. Obviously children are very sensitive and you don’t want to do further damage psychologically.

In terms of resources you would suggest parents might consult, are there websites or agencies where parents might reach out to for information?

Grant:  DCF [the CT Department of Children and Families] is always a good source, as they unfortunately deal with it a lot. And through the courts we have Victims’ Advocate website. They’ll have links to resources.