Juvenile arsonist or victim?

SUGAR NOTCH – Seven-year-old Eddie Palicki seemed like a typical kid to most people.

Outgoing and friendly, he loved to ride his bike, fish, swim and enjoy meals at McDonald’s with his “Nanny Lynn,” family members say.

But authorities say beneath his innocent childhood exterior lay a deeply troubled youth who emerged the afternoon of June 12, 2004.

That’s the day police say Eddie set fire to the Freed Street home of 76-year-old Benjamin Morris, trapping the retired school teacher inside and killing him.

About two weeks later Luzerne County Children and Youth, aware the boy was a suspect in blaze, obtained an emergency court order granting the agency custody of him.

He remains trapped within a juvenile dependency system that refuses to release him, believing he remains a danger to society, his maternal grandmother, Linda Simpson said.

She has spent tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees and hundreds of hours conducting research, contacting civil rights groups and the media in an attempt to expose his story and gain his release, or at least, a say in his treatment.

Since Eddie was taken away, his mother and grandmother have watched as he has been transferred – against their will – to several mental health facilities, including two with specialized programs for fire setters.

Eddie was charged in September 2004 with arson and second-degree murder for the Morris fire. His family contends the case was based on questionable evidence, including a confession they allege was manipulated through trickery and deceit.

Confidentiality rules regarding juveniles prevent county law enforcement and Children and Youth officials from commenting on Eddie’s case. But Linda and Molly said officials have told them they believe Eddie remains a danger to others and needs to remain in treatment.

The women acknowledge Eddie has mental health issues. He’s been diagnosed as having several conditions, including attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder and bi-polar disorder, Molly said.

They also acknowledge Eddie was accused of setting another fire at one of the facilities he was sent to following his removal from home. They contend he was unjustly accused of that fire as well.

While a dispute remains regarding his guilt or innocence, the women say they’re convinced the treatment he’s receiving now is doing him more harm than good.

Eddie has been housed at the Laurel Ridge Center in San Antonio, Texas, since March 2005. Because of the distance, Molly has seen him only once since he was moved there. Her contact is limited to one, 10-minute phone call each day.

“He’s going to have issues. His whole childhood is gone,” Molly, 31, said during a recent interview from her mother’s Mountain Top home. “Birthdays, Christmases, holidays with the family, going to regular school with regular kids, going to football games, having sleepovers with friends. He’s not experienced any of that.”

Is his story a tale of an incredible injustice inflicted upon a little boy who was ripped from his family based on a false allegation, as his family contends?

Or is it a story of a juvenile system doing all it can to help a troubled child while at the same time ensuring the safety of others?

That issue remains in dispute, but people familiar with Eddie’s story agree it’s a unique case that has tested the county’s juvenile system like few others before it.

It started when Sugar Notch police alleged Eddie entered the back porch of Morris’ home and lit a stack of newspapers on fire.

The case was never prosecuted, however, because Eddie was too young. Juvenile delinquency proceedings cannot be held for children under age 10. His case instead proceeded as a dependency case – an action that usually involves abused or neglected children whose care is transferred to Children and Youth.

It was the first of many adverse court rulings that Linda maintains were improperly made.

Self-employed as a disc jockey who plays private parties, Linda, 48, lives a comfortable, middle-class lifestyle. She owns a well-kept home she shared with her husband until his death 10 years ago.

She insists there have never been any allegations of abuse or neglect lodged against her or Molly. She can’t understand why her daughter lost her rights in the first place.

“In certain situations you have families that really aren’t capable of providing for children. There is drug use or abuse or whatever. But we don’t have that,” Linda said. “All we’re guilty of is loving him.”

Under the Adoption and Safe Families Act, if a child is in placement 15 out of 22 months, Children and Youth can seek to terminate a parent’s rights and place the child for adoption. There are exceptions, however, if there is no adoptive resource available.

In Eddie’s case Children and Youth has not moved to terminate Molly’s rights, she said. She has undergone counseling and parenting classes they mandated and the goal remains to reunite Eddie with her or some other family member.

But all decisions regarding his care remain in the hands of Children and Youth and the county court system, which, under law, can retain control over a child until age 21.

“They can hold him as long as they are reviewing the case and as long as they think he’s a danger,” said attorney William Ruzzo, who defended Eddie in the criminal case.

Frank Castano, executive director of Children and Youth, said confidentially laws prohibit him from commenting on why the child remains in placement.

But Ruzzo said Children and Youth’s primary concern is that Linda and Molly refuse to acknowledge the clinical diagnosis that Eddie is a fire setter.

Linda and Molly say they’ll never agree with that diagnosis. They say Eddie is a polite, loveable boy who is not capable of hurting anyone.

“We will not admit that child is guilty of something he’s not guilty of,” Linda said.

Eddie became a suspect in the Morris fire after a neighbor told police she saw the boy running away from the home at around the time the blaze was discovered. Molly has insisted Eddie was with her at Burger King when the fire broke out.

Linda said the charges were based on two confessions Eddie allegedly made to a Sugar Notch Police officer and two Luzerne County detectives. She contends the officers, who questioned Eddie without a parent present, used improper techniques to elicit a false statement.

Luzerne County District Attorney Jacqueline Musto Carroll said she could not comment on Eddie’s case because he is a juvenile.

Speaking generally, Musto Carroll said she is confident her detectives fully investigate all cases, and would not bring charges in any case if they were not convinced the evidence supported the action.

Eddie was initially placed at Kidspeace, a residential facility near Allentown. After he was charged he was transferred to the Bradley Center in Pittsburgh, a residential facility that has a specialized program for fire setters.

He was transferred to the San Antonio center in March 2005 after he was accused of setting fire to his dorm room at the Bradley Center. An Allegheny County fire marshal determined the fire was set by holding a flame to material that was set atop a heating unit.

Linda has adamantly disputed that allegation as well, saying she obtained evidence that heating units at the facility were flawed and the subject of a recall.

She said she understands some people may think she’s simply in denial. But she insists there are other explanations for the fires.

“It has nothing to do with denial. It has to do with I will not admit someone is guilty when I know he’s innocent,” she said. “Do you think I’d fight and go to the lengths I’ve gone, spent the money I’ve spent if I thought he was guilty?”

Linda and Molly said Eddie initially denied setting any fires, but after years of involuntary commitment, he’s been convinced he committed the acts.

“When they first took him it was like, ‘how come I’m here? I didn’t do anything?’ ” Molly said. “Now they’ve brainwashed him into thinking he set this fire and killed this guy.”

Ruzzo has not been directly involved in Eddie’s case since the criminal case was dropped. He has continued to help the family and is now working on arranging for an independent psychological examination of Eddie.

“Children and Youth thinks they’re acting in the best interest of the child. I don’t know if they are or not,” Ruzzo said. “The main thing is we need an independent evaluation of the child by someone who is outside the system who can be dispassionate. I’m not saying the other side is, but they are within the system. The family feels it’s better to have an evaluation by someone they hire who is not in the system and can give an independent evaluation.”

That evaluation has taken on a greater sense of urgency as Laurel Ridge only treats children until age 13. Eddie turns 13 in October. If he’s not returned home he will have to be transferred to another treatment center.

Joe DeVizia, head of the county’ human services department, said he could not comment specifically on Eddie’s case. Speaking generally, he said the county strives to place children as close to home as possible. That’s difficult for children with extreme behavior disorders, particularly fire setters and sex offenders.

DeVizia said the problem is that not many facilities provide the specialized care these children need. Most facilities are reluctant to take such children due to concerns for the safety of others. Those that do exist are frequently full.

“You do everything possible to keep kids as close as home a possible and to get them home. It takes a lot or work. It depends on the readiness of the child and the readiness of the family,” DeVizia said.

Linda and Molly insist the best place for Eddie is with them. They remain hopeful that the independent psychological evaluation will finally provide the evidence they need to get the child returned.

Ruzzo said he’s been in contact with a forensic psychologist in Texas and hopes Eddie can be seen within the next few days.

In the meantime, the only contact his mother and grandmother have is the 10-minute daily phone call and the boxes full of drawings, cards, poems and other writings he has sent them during the five years he’s been institutionalized.

“ Dear Nanny Lynn. How are you. I miss you very much. I love you,” reads one of the cards.

“My Nanny’s name is Linda. She’s a DJ. She gets me pancakes at McDonalds and sings the ‘boots’ song for me,” reads another.

“I’d sing the song ‘These Boots Are Made for Walking’ to him,” Linda explained. “But his favorite was the ‘getcha song’ (‘One Way or Another’ by Blondie). When it gets to the ‘I’m gonna getcha, getcha, getcha’ part I’d come out from around a corner and he’d run,” she said with a laugh.

“He said it was so I could hold his hand,” she said. “The boy wants his family. All that keeps him going is knowing how much he is loved.”

She envisions the day – hopefully by summer – when he returns to ride the mini motorbike she got him the Christmas before he was sent away.

“I parked it in front of the fireplace. He came down the steps and said ‘Oh my God, a motorcycle!’ He jumped right on it,” Linda said. “I said ‘Honey, we have to park it to the weather gets nice.' Well, he never got the chance to ride it.”

No matter how the latest evaluation turns out, Linda vows she will never stop fighting.

“I’ve done everything but sell my house and my vehicles fighting for this little boy. I can’t believe that after five years I still did not win,” she said. “But we have not lost hope. If we lost hope, what would we have left?”