If a report by NBC News is correct, we may have a better idea of why former Penn State President Graham Spanier is trying to gain access to old emails regarding the Jerry Sandusky case.
Maybe it's to begin preparing his defense.
NBC reported Monday that Spanier and former university Vice President Gary Schultz, who at the time was in charge of the university police, exchanged emails on a 2001 allegation that Sandusky, a retired defensive coordinator, was seen molesting a boy in a university shower.
According to NBC News, the emails show Penn State officials did legal research into whether the reported actions constituted a crime and ultimately decided that it would be "humane to Sandusky" to not notify child welfare authorities about the incident.
Where was the concern by Schultz and Spanier about being humane to the alleged victim?
The emails have been turned over to the Attorney General's Office.
Sandusky's trial on 52 charges related to child sexual abuse began Monday. He denies all of the charges.
Schultz, now retired, and Tim Curley, PSU's athletic director who is on paid leave, are awaiting trial on charges of perjury and failure to report suspected child sexual abuse. They also maintain their innocence.
Spanier hasn't been charged, but the emails could change that - if they are as damning as the NBC report indicates.
Last month, Spanier sued Penn State seeking copies of his emails on the Sandusky case between 1998 and 2004. It had been believed the emails were lost in a change of systems, but Spanier's lawsuit said he understood some had been recovered.
Spanier reportedly is refusing to cooperate with investigators hired by Penn State trustees to look into the Sandusky matter and the university's response unless he gets access to the old emails.
It remains to be seen if the emails are as damning as the NBC report indicates. If so, Spanier - and perhaps others - should be charged.
Penn State's top administrators' top concern should have been about the alleged victim of child sexual assault, not the accused perpetrator of such a vile act.
This might not be a case in which a cover-up is worse than the crime. But if there was a cover-up, those responsible should be prosecuted just as aggressively.
