.

Updated: State Police Investigate Child Porn Found on Computer at Seven Fields Mayor’s Home

Troopers execute a search warrant at Mayor Ed Bayne’s home.

State police are investigating child pornography found on a computer in the home of Seven Fields Mayor Ed Bayne, according to a search warrant.

Troopers on Jan. 16 served a warrant to search the home on Graywyck Drive, according to the warrant issued by District Justice David Kovach. Occupants of the home include Bayne, his wife, Macrina Bayne, and two sons.

The investigators have not filed court documents detailing what they seized from the home.

But in an affidavit filed to obtain the warrant, state police computer-crimes investigators said they located a computer address that shared and downloaded child pornography in October. Investigators said they obtained a court order and traced that computer to the Graywyck Drive home, according to the affidavit.

Investigators said they found at least one file from a file-sharing network on the computer that shows a young girl of about 9 or 10 years old performing oral sex on an adult man, the search warrant said. The video was about five minutes long.

Cranberry police Sgt. Chuck Mascellino said officers from the township department assisted state troopers in searching the home.

A neighbor of Bayne who declined to give his name said Graywyck Drive residents witnessed investigators carrying a computer and other electronics from the home Jan. 16.

The neighbor described Bayne as a nice man who often kept to himself and didn't participate in activities with the rest of the neigborhood. 

"It’s a pretty close-knit street," the neighbor said. "We know most of the people pretty well."

Neighbors were shocked when they learned the nature of the search warrant, he said.

"Everyone is just beyond horrified," the neighbor said.

According to his LinkedIn profile, Bayne is a managing principal at Xerox. His wife, Macrina Bayne, is a first-grade teacher at Haine Elementary in Cranberry, according to the Seneca Valley School District.

District spokeswoman Linda Andreassi declined to speak about Macrina Bayne, but said she has not requested a leave of absence.

"As this is an ongoing investigation, the district reserves making comments at this time,” she said.

Seven Fields Manager Tom Smith said he and borough council members are aware the search warrant was executed at Bayne’s home.

“We’re aware that there is an ongoing criminal investigation,” he said.

He added Bayne’s future as mayor of the borough likely will be discussed at an upcoming council meeting. No protocol exists to remove a mayor, Smith said.

Smith pointed out Bayne has not been charged with any offenses. Until charges are filed, the borough will take no action, he said.

Calls to Bayne’ home were unanswered today.

Smith said he has not spoken to Bayne since investigators searched his home. The mayor missed council’s last meeting Jan. 14. Smith said he received an email the day after the meeting in which the mayor explained he missed the meeting because of a family matter.

Bayne was appointed mayor of the borough in 2006 to replace Bruce Daubner, who moved to Columbus, Ohio. He was elected in 2009. His term ends Dec. 31, 2013

Check back with Cranberry Patch for updates to this story.

 Like Us on Facebook | Follow Us on Twitter

Check out some of today's other top stories here .

jim smith January 23, 2013 at 10:36 PM
Really wow over react much? Maybe one of his kids did it??? Wow glad your not on a jury...
Bill Baker January 24, 2013 at 12:52 PM
Media reports have included nonrelated information to make this fellow appear guilty. Typical shabbiness of contemporary journalism.
Giacomo January 24, 2013 at 01:42 PM
I agree with most of the commentators here, and would like to offer a suggestion: Get Microsoft Family (or other equivalent product) loaded onto your PC's, or you just might wake up one morning and see your face in the newspaper with a "pervert" stamp affixed. Get it now! It takes <30 minutes to download and install. Just from circumstantial evidence, I've come to the preliminary conclusion that one of the sons [ages omitted from the article, interestingly] "got curious" and downloaded porn -- absolutely 100% expected when kids get to a certain age. However, this guy's face and name has now appeared in a local newspaper connected with a sex crime, and it's impossible to erase the imagery created by the article -- at least one life ruined, because of "boys being boys." Protect yourself and your PC's from inadvertent self-defamation! Do it!
Giacomo January 24, 2013 at 01:46 PM
Agreed, Steve. I have a technologically adept teenage son. I need to stay a step ahead of him, and it's not easy.
Giacomo January 24, 2013 at 01:48 PM
Astute comment, Bill. I appreciate Jessica's products -- the Patch is a great rag, normally, but this article is doing a disservice by filtering info, or just not being thorough enough to present the story in an evenhanded fashion.
Jessica Sinichak January 24, 2013 at 01:52 PM
Giacomo, I didn't "omit" the ages. I don't know the ages of his children and (while the names of two of the sons were provided) the ages were not included in the search warrant.
karen turley January 24, 2013 at 02:02 PM
PVS: Your borough used to be a part of Cranberry Township many years ago. There was some in Adams and some in Cranberry and it was all turned into it's own borough. There was a police dept and they even had a fire truck. I don't remember all the reasons for it any more.
Steve January 24, 2013 at 02:20 PM
I've gathered through the "rumor mill" that the original developer of Seven Fields couldn't come to an agreement with Cranberry supervisors about his grandiose neighborhood. So, he simply incorporated his own borough and the rest is history. Again, this was obtained via hearsay, so I'd be interested to learn its actual history. Here's some interesting reading: http://dicesare-englerproductions.com/Adams_Ridge.html
7fields resident January 24, 2013 at 02:28 PM
Maybe the editor can explain why she choose to report on this now and not wait for all the facts? I feel really bad for the other family members.
Waiting resident January 24, 2013 at 03:09 PM
I don't care who in the house was "curious"... It was CHILD porn Giacomo... A nine year old girl. That is not boys being boys... That is someone with a sick mind!! I don't want anyone's life ruined either, but lets be clear about what was found...
Seven Fields Resident January 24, 2013 at 03:25 PM
"Boys being boys"??? When I think of boys just being boys, I think of sports, rough-housing and maybe being a little flirtatious with girls....NOT downloading a 5 minute porn video of a nine year old girl performing a sex act!!!
Giacomo January 24, 2013 at 03:29 PM
Please do not be deluded into thinking that boys with Internet access in 2013 will limit themselves to sports, rough-housing, and flirtation.
Giacomo January 24, 2013 at 03:30 PM
Jessica, I interpret from your response that your intention was not to defame Mr. Bayne by omitting data. That's good. What we can learn from this episode is how astonishingly easy it is to unintentionally incriminate an individual when a complete set of facts is not available. Your pen is indeed mighty. And thanks for providing this service. I know it's not easy. Giacomo
Seven Fields Resident January 24, 2013 at 03:35 PM
Do you honestly think one is deluded and naive enough to think that in this day n age with unlimited internet access to all kinds of things, that I don't understand boys (and girls for that matter) can't find stuff on there that they shouldn't? But just because one can access that sort of stuff, doesn't mean you SHOULD!!!!!
Jessica Sinichak January 24, 2013 at 03:43 PM
Absolutely, Giacomo. As a journalist who takes her job very seriously, I would never omit, filter and intentionally defame anyone in an article. My job is to present the facts as accurately and as fairly as possibly. Opinions, no doubt, will be drawn from that—and news isn't always pleasant. The facts so far are that police served a search warrant at that house because child porn was found on a computer, and that's what the article says. I will continue to keep everyone updated.
Waiting resident January 24, 2013 at 03:45 PM
First of all, this is assuming it was one of the boys...if it was, unlimited Internet access still doesn't excuse an interest in seeing a child perform a sex act! The fact that you keep trying to make excuses for it makes me question your moral compass!! That being said, I am not saying string anyone up. Wait for all of the facts and then let's decide....
Giacomo January 24, 2013 at 03:46 PM
Sounds like we pretty much agree, then. That's why in a previous post I advocate a free download, subscription, and activation of parental controls such as Microsoft Family (the one I employ). That way, when kids have a bad behavior moment, the consequences are not catastrophic.
Giacomo January 24, 2013 at 03:56 PM
I understand why my cold response could make you question my moral compass. You don't know me personally, so it is natural to draw this conclusion based on my apparent lack of outrage in this forum. To be frank, I am consciously trying to be objective and put aside my natural sense of outrage at the hideous crime of child pornographic exploitation. So, let me be clear. I do not condone child pornography, and condemn all forms of exploitation, especially that of children. That being said, the line between good and bad behavior is not always crystal clear for a young curious adolescent surfing the Internet. We, as parents, need to draw the lines clearly for them, and guide them into forming strong moral criteria. It's our job. You are also correct in restating that we are basing a great deal of "breath" over an assumption. There are still very many voids in the narrative.
PVS January 24, 2013 at 06:11 PM
Wait for all of the facts? Seriously? That could take months or years -- we may never know. The editor (Jessica) has reported the facts as we currently know them and the news is being reported by every local media outlet (see, kdka, wpxi, wtae, triblive, post-gazette). Don't chastise her for doing her job.
Steven Bone January 24, 2013 at 06:13 PM
The fact that a file exists depicting what is claimed means nothing by itself. Once you get into file sharing sites they are the black market of the internet. I'd also presume those involved in this type of illegal activity have some way of identifying files by encoding their filenames in some way. This means it could have been inadvertent - the name of the file did not indicate that type of content. Especially given only one file was found. The other possibility is that some malicious software got installed on a computer there, and that was downloading random content and 'storing' it for some other person to grab later. Generally, this would be without any human intervention, just a poorly secured computer/network. It also would mean > 1 file. It could also be 100% intentional. It is pretty easy to determine the differences between these things. Giacomo is correct, YOU are responsible for your computer and network. Be proactive and LEARN how to protect yourself.
Steve January 24, 2013 at 07:27 PM
Let's just continue a presumption that it was an underage boy who was viewing the said material. We do not know, as another pointed out, how such material was accessed. It could have been unintentional, or even just a generic search by an adolescent looking for "porn" (perhaps just for laughs or pubescent intrigue). With that said, perhaps the bigger issue shouldn't who/why has it -- maybe we should all be concerned as to where it originated. There surely must be some way to track where it came from and figure out who made it.
Waiting resident January 24, 2013 at 08:51 PM
Ok ... It was a 5 minute video that has been downloaded to a computer in that home and has been on that computer since October of last year along with 24 OTHER files that were found on that same computer. I am all for hearing the whole story, but 24 child porn files along with a video doesn't scream pubescent intrigue to me.
Seven Fields Resident January 24, 2013 at 09:26 PM
I couldn't agree with you more, "Waiting Resident"!!!! Great point!
7-fields January 25, 2013 at 12:22 AM
Sounds like you have a previous issue with Seven Fields.
7-fields January 25, 2013 at 12:30 AM
I agree with B1. The investigation will surely turn up the truth. Its unikely the whole family is involved so shame on the editor for her disregard for the other family members with her response to Giacomo.
Frank Essek January 25, 2013 at 01:30 AM
“Putzgrab – an overly dramatic or sensational newspaper, internet, or television headline that is designed to grab the reader’s attention.” The guy’s name is printed . Where he lives is printed. Where he works is printed. His wife’s name is printed. Where his wife works is printed. How many kids he has is printed. All this before an arrest is made. Why not tell us who the grandparents are and where they live and work? How about their friend’s names and addresses? Why not get statements from neighbors they say they saw other neighbors going into the house? What were they doing in there? Was there a group porn viewing? I think their names should be printed also. This article is proof that “inquiring minds want to know”. Knowing that there are people right now looking at porn on their computers makes me sick. I’m only a little less sick knowing this entire family’s reputation is now destroyed regardless of what happens because of news stories like this. Stories like this are known as “pornography to the inquiring mind”. I now have to hope a search warrant is not issued for my house because I read this article.
Catalina January 25, 2013 at 01:43 AM
According to the article, "investigators said they found at least one file from a file-sharing network on the computer." It could be that someone else did it but because they share networks, the information appeared in his computer. (?) I have this concern because one day pictures of people I do not know appeared in my brand new computer.
Lady Blake January 25, 2013 at 01:59 AM
Indeed, Mr Essek. We do want to know it all, right now! We want to circle the wagons and protect ourselves. Reject, refute and obliterate the awful things that are now commonplace in our worlds. As we should. However, in our rush to do that, are we throwing innocent, unsuspecting people under the bus? Let the cops flesh it out. We are all on alert. If it was his kid(s) and there are, in fact, several other videos of this same disgusting nature, stop the little $hit right now, get him help. If it was the mayor, prosecute him in every legal way. Until we know, back off, let them breathe and deal with this horrendous situation. More than likely it was one perpetrator. Don't hang the rest of the family, have some mercy for them. Wouldn't you deserve the same?
Waiting resident January 27, 2013 at 02:59 AM
I don't think we should jump to any conclusions or assume that anyone from that residence is guilty of anything... The worst thing you can do is drag an innocent man through the mud... My biggest concern is with people saying it could just be boys being boys or pubescent curiosity ... I think that is a harmful view to take ... Lets hope people jumped the gun and a lot of people will owe that family apologies ... But let's not ever say, regardless if its one file or 400, that child porn is something that can be poo-pooed as innocent curiosity...
SpendingMaster May 15, 2013 at 08:55 PM
It shouldn't come as a surprise now that he won't run for reelection. Never saw this coming. It's been awhile since this. I wonder if there have been any updates.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »