Prosecutors Respond To Attorney General Investigation
HARRISBURG — Jerry Sandusky was charged nearly three years after a boy from Clinton County came forward to say he was abused by the Penn State coach.
“Taking the evidence as it was at the time, then the decision not to charge fit within acceptable bounds of prosecutorial discretion,” said Geoffrey Moulton
Investigator Geoffrey Moulton says prosecutors could have had more evidence earlier against Sandusky if they hadn’t made some initial mistakes.
But the prosecutors who got the conviction against Sandusky said they had legitimate reasons for their early moves, responding, “We believe the citizens of Pennsylvania are far more interested in results than in attempts to second guess and finely sift for criticisms.”
Former Luzerne County District Attorney and Judge Peter Paul Olszewski agrees that it’s hard to judge an investigation in hindsight that prosecutors face tough choices.
“I think it’s difficult to criticize investigators and prosecutors at this point in time. Prosecutors have discretion and that’s a huge part of what prosecutors use every day,” Olszewski said.
But Olszewski believes the AG’s probe was important in its main finding.
“I think the public can certainly rest a lot easier when the investigation found that politics is not directly responsible for delays in the prosecution.”
The prosecutors who convicted Sandusky added, “no member of this team deserves criticism or censure by the public because this team accomplished a very rare feat: the near-perfect discovery and prosecution of a horribly successful serial pedophile.”
The report issued Monday also has some recommendations about what should be done in future sex abuse investigations, but it still leaves room for people to debate the length of the Sandusky investigation.