March 2nd, 2012
01:45 AM ET

Sandusky federal probe may have different focus

It's fairly clear the federal investigation into Penn State University won't be a duplication of the grand jury probe that led to charges of more than 50 counts of child sex abuse against Jerry Sandusky.

Instead, federal authorities seem to be stepping into areas where the state attorney general's office hasn't gone.

This time, they seem to be exploring the possibility of a cover-up at Penn State, as well as possible bribes, fraud, or misuse of federal money, according to three former federal prosecutors asked to independently review the subpoena Penn State received February 2.


Filed under: Crime • U.S.
soundoff (18 Responses)
  1. Mary

    I would hope that the investigation into; bribes, fraud, and misuse of Federal $$ will not OVERSHADOW the charges and subsequent trial of Sandusky.

    The investigation should be named "The FEDERAL – PROBING of Jerry Sandusky"

    One more thought. If this investigation yields more arrests, specifically in a "cover-up"... you are then considered an accomplice to that crime. Imagine being out in public and seeing someone being rayped! Who the heck goes to the "campus police" ?

    This was a federal crime! As the federal government is changing its longstanding definition of “forcible raype” in compiling national crime statistics — expanding both the definition of victims, to include males, and the types of s e x u a l assault that will be counted in the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Report.

    Reminder... Pedo's like both

    Men who ONLY do boys are unequivocally g a y which will lead to "intent" under prosecutions burden of proof.

    March 2, 2012 at 4:39 am | Report abuse |
  2. Mary

    Women who are attracted to men ... does anyone see something wrong with that ?
    Men who are attracted to women ... would anyone see something wrong with that ?
    Men who are attracted to "males" ... does ANYONE see something wrong with that ? ... posing that question to all

    Dig into the bible before you answer that last question.

    Leviticus 22:18

    March 2, 2012 at 4:48 am | Report abuse |
    • leeintulsa

      you forgot women who are attracted to women. and i don't see anything wrong with that, either.

      dig into reality and embrace the horror.

      March 2, 2012 at 7:59 am | Report abuse |
    • banasy©

      I noticed that omission, too. Wonder why?

      March 2, 2012 at 8:35 am | Report abuse |
    • Mary

      @ Lee and banasy, You have the right to k i l l a baby ... what MORE do you want?

      March 2, 2012 at 11:19 pm | Report abuse |
  3. Deborah Evans

    Dear G-d,
    I pray they give it all they can.

    March 2, 2012 at 7:05 am | Report abuse |

    "I reject all the biblical views of the truth
    Dismiss it as the folklore of the times
    I won't be force-fed prophecies
    From the book of untruths for the weakest mind
    I keep the bible in a pool of blood
    So that none of its lies can affect me"

    March 2, 2012 at 7:24 am | Report abuse |
    • Mary

      I'm actually crying right now. Maybe you could keep the door open a little? Just in case you change your mind.
      (((((HUG))))) and AGAPE' 🙂

      March 2, 2012 at 11:15 pm | Report abuse |
    • nuh

      I've read the bible. I'll keep the door shut, thanks 🙂

      March 2, 2012 at 11:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • MP ΘY

      Mary, that was a song by a group name Slayer, and you:re silly by any standards. I've seem your posts, and you are all over the page when it comes to being a student of the bible, You don't pracice what you preach, ((((((((HUG))))))))) agape, my little finger. Hush now.

      March 3, 2012 at 2:43 am | Report abuse |
    • Mary

      Ok, so I'm silly then President Obama who swore on the Bible and 85% of Americans are as well.
      You must be in the 15% who would rather enjoy Satan as your God and all HIS false teachings.

      March 3, 2012 at 10:31 am | Report abuse |
  5. banasy©


    March 2, 2012 at 7:30 am | Report abuse |
  6. Portland tony

    Put your Bible back on the shelf! This federal case is about misuse of funds and a subsequent cover up,

    March 2, 2012 at 8:26 am | Report abuse |
  7. banasy©

    If the tree is poisoned, the fruit of it will be, too.

    March 2, 2012 at 8:36 am | Report abuse |
  8. CenTexan©

    Why does it sort of bother me to see "Sandusky" and "probe" used in the same sentence?

    March 2, 2012 at 12:37 pm | Report abuse |
    • banasy©

      They wrote it that way for a reason, of course...
      Inquiry would have been my choice, but then, I'm not much into posting for shock value.


      March 2, 2012 at 2:40 pm | Report abuse |
  9. Philip

    Generally speaking, Americans believe in God and have no problem with our president's swearing an oath on the bible or our congress praying for guidance before each and every session. Where americans have trouble with God is when God's laws prohibit certain actions in the bedroom. (just like the US military code outlawing sodomy for troops) As long as the law stays out of their bedrooms, most Americans have no trouble with abiding by it. But once that law governs bedrooms, people begin to question it...even throw rocks at it and it's author.

    March 3, 2012 at 10:45 am | Report abuse |
  10. Mary

    The standard of Mans morality vastly differ from Gods Morality (whats right and wrong)

    March 3, 2012 at 11:11 am | Report abuse |