Why Sandusky investigation lasted two years before charges brought

Gov. Tom Corbett, then the state attorney general, oversaw the start of the Sandusky investigation after the former Penn State assistant coach was barred from a high school in 2009 when a mother complained about Sandusky. Charges were filed last November.

Gene J. Puskar/AP
Former Penn State University assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky (rear) leaves the Centre County Courthouse with a Centre County Sheriff's deputy after being found guilty of multiple charges of child sexual abuse in Bellefonte, Pa., on June 22.

Prosecutors needed about two years between the first report of child sexual abuse involving Jerry Sandusky and the filing of charges because authorities needed to build an "ironclad case" against him, Gov. Tom Corbett said Monday.

Corbett, then the state attorney general, oversaw the start of the Sandusky investigation after the former Penn State assistant coach was barred from a high school in 2009 when a mother complained about Sandusky. Charges were filed last November.

"I think it surprises some people, the length of time it took," Corbett said. "But having been an assistant DA, an assistant U.S. attorney and handling cases like this, I understood that you have to do a complete investigation and get as many witnesses as you possibly can."

Corbett said the wisdom of the investigation's deliberate pace was evident in the jury's decisive verdict on Friday — convicting Sandusky on all but three counts.

"I think the jury demonstrated with their convictions on 45 of 48 counts that it was an ironclad case," Corbett told CBS' "This Morning."

While defending the slower pace of the investigation, Corbett also defended the speed with which Sandusky'scase went from grand jury presentment to trial — seven months. Defense attorney Joe Amendola has said he and fellow attorney Karl Rominger didn't have enough time to prepare their defense and even asked to withdraw from the case because they weren't prepared.

"I'm not surprised that they would say that," Corbett said.

"Obviously it will be the subject of an appeal at some point in time. ... But in this case the jury had the opportunity to hear the compelling testimony of these now young men who were young boys who suffered at the hands of this pedophile."

The current state attorney general, Linda Kelly, told NBC's "Today" show that all parties involved knew the judge intended to move quickly. She said prosecutors supported that decision because Sandusky was on house arrest while awaiting trial.

"We were anxious just to bring the case to a conclusion and move to have his bond revoked and taken into custody," Kelly said.

Sandusky, 68, remains behind bars in the Centre County Correctional Facility, where he's been held since late Friday. It could be months before he's sentenced, and his own attorneys say he will likely spend the rest of his life in prison.

Kelly said Sandusky's sentence will be up to the judge, but she believes the severity of the charges merits a harsh punishment.

"Our prosecution team will ask the judge to fashion a sentence that reflects the horrific acts Mr. Sanduskycommitted, that takes into account the number of victims that are involved here and the fact that he really does represent a clear and present danger to the community," Kelly said.

Sandusky's conviction is only just the start of possibly years of legal proceedings over the case. Besides appeals, there remains an active investigation into Sandusky by the state attorney general's office as well as a federal investigation.

Corbett said Penn State trustees are still awaiting the results of an internal investigation by former FBI director Louis Freeh into the school's handling of the Sandusky case.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.