July 2nd, 2012
10:36 PM ET

Paterno's role in Sandusky case examined

Purported emails between Penn State officials raise questions about Joe Paterno's influence in handling Jerry Sandusky’s sex abuse crimes in 2001. Susan Candiotti reports.

Post by:
Filed under: Jerry Sandusky • Joe Paterno
soundoff (4 Responses)
  1. Anne

    From reading the "emails" I would infer that the Penn State officials had priorities - ( 1 ) protecting Penn State first, ( 2 ) protecting Sandusky second ( let's be humane and not report any of these allegations ). The welfare of the children was NOT on their list of priorities. They naively believed that "talking to" a sexual predator would somehow solve the problem. There are none so blind as those who choose not to see.

    July 5, 2012 at 10:04 am |
  2. Muharrem Onar

    I would not be surprised a bit if JoPa was involved in the cover up of Sandusky. Was Sundusky so irreplaceable?

    July 3, 2012 at 2:14 pm |
  3. louis devault

    I have examined the various records surrounding this case and Although I understand the sympathy surrounding the so called 2nd mile charity. I must also be offended by the language of only a charity. Clearly the 2nd mile was one of the first subcontractor pilot programs in the united states. Let me explain since the 1990s various state departments of child protective services have been slowly but continuously subcontracting out direct services to foster kids. These contractors are licensed and fully aware of the reporting issues involved in child abuse allegations. In many of these companies ownership and management boards are judges, senators, and social services workers retired etc. These private contractors are licensed by the states and sign agreements that they shall operate within the laws and guidelines of CPS. Telling them of abuse is the same as telling the police and juvenile courts. Earlier in this case I went on record that we are trusting a system to put itself on trial. This investigation may be under federal jurisdiction so why is it being handled by the state, that was in business with the 2nd mile. This case clearly demonstrates the need for a department of internal affairs, this branch if formed must be autonomous from the state social services and have direct access to the grand jury. Only then can we be sure that the rotten circumstances demonstrated so clearly in this abuse, are no longer mitigated away.

    July 3, 2012 at 1:57 am |
    • louis devault

      why was this not posted through out the case by the state of pennsylvania or was it left blacked out by design?

      July 3, 2012 at 1:06 pm |