Pat Little / Reuters file

Former Penn State football coach Jerry Sandusky, center, leaves the Centre County Courthouse after his sentencing in his child sex abuse case in Bellefonte, Penn., on Oct. 9, 2012.

A judge in Pennsylvania has ordered a special prosecutor to examine if secrecy rules were violated in connection with a grand jury that investigated former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky as well as three former school administrators who face criminal charges.

Judge Barry Feudale named attorney James M. Reeder on Feb. 8 as the special prosecutor and gave him six months to investigate secrecy issues related to the grand jury.

The judge's order was obtained by the Associated Press on Wednesday.

Still, it was not clear if any potential violations of secrecy rules were related to the Penn State cases or any others before the 33^rd Statewide Investigation Grand Jury, the AP reported, because such grand juries often work on more than one matter at the same time. 

Feudale, the AP reported, recently was weighing a legal dispute involving whether former Penn State lawyer Cynthia Baldwin should have been present at a grand jury proceeding.

The order referred to a rule that governs who may be present during the grand jury sessions. Lawyers for the three former administrators have said their clients' rights to legal counsel were violated by Baldwin's actions and were seeking to have her barred from testifying in hearings related to their cases.

Baldwin's lawyer, Charles De Monaco, has said she "at all times fulfilled her obligations to the university and its agents."

On June 22, 2012, Sandusky was convicted of 45 counts of child sexual abuse and he is now serving a 30 to 60-year sentence in a state prison.

Two grand jury reports accused Sandusky of having used his connections to the Penn State football program to “groom” boys, whom he met through his Second Mile charity for troubled children, for sexual relations. Sandusky has maintained his innocence and is appealing his case.

Former Penn State President Graham Spanier, former Vice President Gary Schultz and former Athletic Director Timothy Curley face charges of perjury in connection with their grand jury testimony in the Sandusky case. They also face charges of obstruction, conspiracy, endangering the welfare of children and failure to properly report suspected abuse. The three dispute all of the allegations.

The state of Pennsylvania took the field on behalf of battered Penn State on Wednesday, with Gov. Tom Corbett announcing a lawsuit against the NCAA over sanctions imposed on the university in the wake of the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse scandal.

"This was a criminal matter, not a violation of NCAA rules,” Corbett said at a press conference Wednesday to announce the lawsuit would be filed in U.S. District Court in Harrisburg, Pa., later in the day. "The NCAA didn't have any business in imposing these sanctions."

The university agreed in July to the sanctions, which included a $60 million fine that would be used nationally to finance child abuse prevention grants. The sanctions also included a four-year bowl game ban for the university's marquee football program, reduced football scholarships and the forfeiture of 112 wins but didn't include a suspension of the football program, the so-called death penalty.

"Penn State does have a moral responsibility to the victims and to the community, and it has accepted that responsibility and is working with the victims in the civil courts," Corbett said, standing in front of a group of business owners on Penn State's campus in College Park. "Penn State should continue to work with the victims of sexual abuse and an effort towards prevention, so we can assure that tragedies like this never happen again. With that said, though, the NCAA shouldn't have sanctioned Penn State. I believe and our suit contends that the NCAA has no authority and operated outside of their own bylaws with these sanctions they brought."

State and congressional lawmakers from Pennsylvania have objected to using the Penn State fine to finance activities in other states. Penn State has already made the first $12 million payment, and an NCAA task force is deciding how it should be spent.

In a statement issued after Corbett's announcement, Donald M. Remy, NCAA executive vice president and general counsel, said the governor was belatedly interceding in a matter that was well on its way to being resolved.

"We are disappointed by the governor's action today," Remy said. "Not only does this forthcoming lawsuit appear to be without merit, it is an affront to all of the victims in this tragedy -- lives that were destroyed by the criminal actions of Jerry Sandusky. While the innocence that was stolen can never be restored, Penn State has accepted the consequences for its role and the role of its employees and is moving forward. Today's announcement by the governor is a setback to the university's efforts."

Penn State also issued a statement saying that it "is not a party to the lawsuit and has not been involved in its preparation or filing."

The NCAA has previously indicated that at least a quarter of the $60 million would be spent in Pennsylvania, but that continues to be a sore point with some Pennsylvania lawmakers.

Republican Rep. Charlie Dent called the NCAA's response "unacceptable and unsatisfactory" to a request from the state's House delegation that the whole $60 million be distributed to causes within the state.

Last week, state Sen. Jake Corman, a Republican whose district includes Penn State's main campus, said he plans to seek court action barring any of the first $12 million from being released to groups outside the state.

In announcing the news conference, Corbett, a Republican, did not indicate whether his office coordinated its legal strategy with state Attorney General-elect Kathleen Kane, who is scheduled to be sworn in Jan. 15.

Watch the most-viewed videos on NBCNews.com

Kane, a Democrat, ran on a vow to investigate why it took state prosecutors nearly three years to charge Sandusky, an assistant under legendary football coach Joe Paterno. Corbett was the attorney general when that office took over the case in early 2009 and until he became governor in January 2011. 

Sandusky, 68, was convicted in June on charges he sexually abused 10 boys, some on Penn State's campus. He's serving a 30- to 60-year state prison term.

Eight young men testified against him, describing a range of abuse they said went from grooming and manipulation to fondling, oral sex and anal rape when they were boys.

Sandusky did not testify at his trial but has maintained his innocence, acknowledging he showered with boys but insisting he never molested them.

NBC News' Tom Winter and the Associated Press contributed to this report. 

More content from NBCNews.com:

• One inch: Death in combat hinges on the tiniest margins
• Despite 'fiscal cliff' deal, more political drama likely on way
• Handcuffed California teen shot while in police custody
• Legalized pot, gay marriage: Are we all Washington now?
• New laws target sex offenders with Santa suits, and more
• Video: Two teens, 12-year-old charged in fatal carjacking

Follow US news from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook

Essex County Department of Correction

Robert Mucha has been charged with two counts of possessing child pornography.

In the complaint explaining why Robert Mucha, 56, was being charged with two counts of possessing child porn, federal prosecutors detailed what they said was the man’s fantasy of basting a 2-year-old boy in barbecue sauce, roasting him and then eating him like a Thanksgiving turkey.

Mucha, of Newton, N.J., was also charged with luring a 15-year-old boy to his apartment. He was arrested in July.

According to court records, Mucha maintained an account on Yahoo!, where he met with others to exchange pornography and to talk about raping, roasting and eating children.

Mucha allegedly maintained a lively online correspondence with a man from Kansas, with whom he focused on “the cooking and eating of prepubescent boys, with a particular interest in how they might abduct the children, drug them, roast them and, ultimately, consume them.”  

The prosecutors allege that on one occasion, Mucha said to his online friend that it was “stupid” for Jerry Sandusky, the convicted Penn State football coached sentenced for 30 to 60 years for pedophilia, to have abused one of his victims in a gym shower – a semi-public location.

The prosecutors out of the U.S. District Court of New Jersey say that Mucha lured a 15-year-old boy he had befriended to his apartment. That night, they say, Mucha allegedly attempted to molest him, but the boy said he did not want to be touched. The boy soon after left the apartment.

Police searched Mucha’s apartment on July 25. Shortly after the search, police say that Mucha told officers about his fantasy about basting a toddler – and said that sometimes he imagines himself as the victim.

According to prosecutors, Mucha also said that he had made physical contact with “numerous teenage boys over the course of his life.” He allegedly told police that when he taught Drum & Bugle Corps in New Jersey, he watched young boys shower and occasionally joined them. 

Prosecutors said he is also a member of websites dedicated to cannibalism and necrophilism fetishists.

More content from NBCNews.com:

• Mother of girl fatally shot on Florida school bus: 'I want answers'
• Local TV station's anchors quit on-air after evening news broadcast
• Newark Mayor Booker sparks melee with council vote
• Police question 'person of interest' in serial NYC shopkeeper murders
• Video: President Obama pardons two real turkeys

Follow US news from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook

Matt Rourke / AP

Former Penn State University assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky is driven from the Centre County Courthouse after being sentenced in Bellefonte, Pa., on Tuesday.

PHILADELPHIA -- Convicted child sex abuser Jerry Sandusky perceived himself as David, fighting Goliath as the sex scandal unfolded, sending him to prison for at least 30 years, rewriting the history of one of the greatest college football programs in the country, and prompting the firing of its legendary coach, Joe Paterno.

"I was supposed to be David but failed to pick up the sling shot," Sandusky wrote in a letter to Judge John Cleland of McKean County Common Pleas Court less than two weeks before he was sentenced. "Goliath won, and I must deal with the outcome. Just like preparing for an athletic contest, I am trying to prepare for what comes." 

The letter was released to the public Thursday morning by court officials.

Also on NBCPhiladelphia.com: Anger fuels Ben Franklin bust theft, police say

Sandusky sent the letter to the judge hoping to influence him as he decided how to punish the former Penn State assistant football coach. Sandusky was convicted in June on 45 counts of child sex abuse. His wife, Dottie, also wrote a letter. Both parents put some of the blame for Sandusky's guilty verdicts on their son, Matt. Late in the trial, as the jury was already deliberating, Matt Sandusky made a stunning announcement through his attorney that his father abused him too when he was a boy.

"In my heart I know I did not do these disgusting acts," Sandusky wrote. "However, I didn't tell the jury. Our son changed our plans when he switched sides."

In her letter, Dottie Sandusky attacked Matt's mental state, telling the judge people need to understand what type of person he is.

"We have forgiven him many times for all he has done to our family thinking that he was changing his life, but he would always go back to his stealing and lies," she wrote. "He has been diagnose (sic) with Bipolar, but he refuses to take his medicine."

Dottie Sandusky to judge: 'Jerry is not the monster'

Information came out after Sandusky's conviction that he never testified at trial because his son Matt had threatened to take the stand if Sandusky talked. Sandusky, 68, ended up defending himself, defiantly, a total of three times before he was sentenced. First, in an 11th-hour type of move, a Penn State radio station played a three-minute statement he recorded from jail earlier that day. The tone and themes of that statement lasted for 18 minutes the next morning, as Sandusky rambled on in court, blaming a web of conspirators for his downfall. That was right before the judge admonished him and then sentenced him to a minimum of 30 years, but no more than 60 years, in prison.

"You abused the trust of those who trusted you. . .so the crime isn't just what you did to their bodies, but to their psyche; their soul," Cleland said in court.

Here is the entire text of Sandusky's letter to the judge:

September 27, 2012

Hon. John M. Cleland, Senior Judge Specially Presiding

Dear Sir:

I write without expectation or a plea for leniency. However, I write with hope and resolve to keep fighting for a brighter day. This has been quite an experience. As I sat looking at walls, I spent many hours reliving this ordeal. First, I looked at me, my vulnerability, my naivety (some say stupidity), and my trust in people. Soon, my thoughts turned to all the special people who have been hurt. My heart saddened, and my eyes filled. Later, I began to relive the events leading up to the trial and the trial. Having the time to do it was not the problem it had been in preparation. There were so many people involved in the orchestration of this conviction (media, investigators, prosecutors, "the system", Penn State, and the accusers). It was well done. They won! When I thought about how it transpired, I wondered what they had won. I thought of the methods, decisions, and allegations. I relieved the inconsistent and dishonest testimonies. My mind wondered again. What would be the outcome of all the honest testimonies? My mind wondered again. What would be the outcome of all the accusers and their families who were investigated? I knew the answer. All of their issues would surface. They would no longer be these poor, innocent people, as portrayed. I have been blamed for all of their failures and shortcomings, but nobody mentioned the impact of the people who spent much more time with them than I did. Nobody mentioned the impact of abandonment, neglect, abuse, insecurity, and conflicting messages that the biological parents might have had in this. Those who have worked with troubled lives realize a common reaction for those with low self esteem is often to blame others. They have been rewarded for forgetting, fabricating, and exaggerating. Maybe, they will have a better place to live, a new car, access to more highs, but they won't change. Most of their rewards will be very temporary.

When I reflected, I realized much of what transpired was about protection. I was placed in protective custody; "the system" protected "the system", the media, the prosecution, the civil attorneys, and the accusers. Everybody protected themselves. Penn State, with its own system, protected their public image, their decisions, and the allegations. The authorities were protected. Media protected their jobs and ambitions. Prosecutors protected their jobs and egos. "The system" protected the prosecution. As the stakes became higher, people had more to protect. Civil attorneys were protected. The accusers were protected and provided access to potential financial gain, free attorneys, accolades, psychologists, and attention. Current and former police investigators protected their decisions and explanations to avoid criticism. The jury put up a protective shield to avoid criticism from family, friends, and the public.

Ringing through my ears were attorney Amendola's words, "It doesn't make sensei" I asked myself. Is justice more than just a word? Is fairness more than just a dream? My jaw began to tighten. Then I thought of not being able to be with my wife Dottie, not seeing our dog, Bo, not being there for our kids, not seeing our grandchildren mature, not being with friends, not playing games with loved ones and friends, helping others less, laughing less, and crying more. A chill went up my spine, and my eyes filled again.

Eventually, I thought of the words of Thoreau sent to me by a friend, "It's not what you look at that matters, it's what you see." Instead of walls, I saw great memories: I saw loved ones who will carry the light; I saw family and friends; I saw those who overcame huge obstacles; I saw all the people who thrived with a little of our help and hope; I saw a locker room with people hugging and crying as national champs; I saw all the people who have stood by me; I saw all the inspirational cards and letters I had received; I saw me throwing thousands of kids up in the air and them asking for more; I saw me in hundreds of water battles that nobody wanted to end; I saw black, white, brown, yellow, young, old, gifted, and handicapped all at our home; I saw kids laughing and playing; I saw a big, lovable dog licking their faces; and I saw inmates who smiled at me and offered kindness even when I was confined. My heart began to warm.

I've had some difficulties seeing a purpose. The best immediate one may be some vulnerable children may be helped. Some, who may have been abused, might not be as a result of the publicity. I'm not sure about that. I would relish the opportunity to be a little candle for other inmates, as some have been a light for me. Otherwise, I hope the suffering improves our chances for a better life when the last breath comes.

Searching for strength I read many books. One was about a family's efforts to help abandoned children in Romania. It was familiar to me. Most of them were about life's struggles and people's strength to endure. Systems all over the world demanded control and were willing to destroy lives to maintain it. These books represented the worst of life and the best of life. There was extreme greed, hate, and cruelty, combined with love and forgiveness. It was as dismal as it could be, but there was always a little light. The suffering of millions put my struggle in some perspective, and hopefully, will bring strength and courage throughout the rest of my journey.

The book with the most impact for me was entitled Left to Tell. It was about an amazing woman of tremendous faith who survived the Rwandan Holocaust. Over a million people were killed because they had to pick sides. She talked about what happened. In the words of a pastor, "I've seen these killing sprees before - once the blood lust is in the air, you can trust no one, not even your own children." There was betrayal and murder. Families turned against one another. Best friends became enemies. Those who had been helped at one point in their life sought and killed those who had helped them. In a lesser way I've experienced this. Through the darkness there was light. Loyalty prevailed when the lady's (Imaculee's) brother stood up for her before his execution. He said, "Even if I knew where my beautiful sister was, I wouldn't tell you." I also related to that as my loved ones and true friends have remained loyal to me.

My trust in people, systems, and fairness has diminished. My faith in God who sends light through the darkness has remained. My heart has been broken but still works. In my heart I know I did not do these disgusting acts. However, I didn't tell the jury. Our son changed our plans when he switched sides. I was supposed to be David but failed to pick up the sling shot. Goliath won, and I must deal with the outcome. Just like preparing for an athletic contest, I am trying to prepare for what comes. I have chosen books with this mind. I have given many second chances and will ask for one. The battle will continue for me and those like Imaculee's brother who remained loyal and shared the hurt.

Respectfully submitted,

Jerry Sandusky

Although Sandusky's sentence is tantamount to a life sentence for the 68-year-old, his attorneys say he truly believes he can get the verdict overturned. They are planning to appeal on the grounds that Sandusky's defense team did not have enough time to adequately prepare his case.

More content from NBCNews.com:

• Ex-Connecticut firefighter pleads guilty to 1986 fatal arson
• Maryland boy, 4, injured but alive after fall from 9th-story window
• Video: Aggressive Biden on the attack in Ryan debate
• Two toddlers critically injured in attack by aunt's Rottweilers
• Panetta: Cyber intruders have already infiltrated US systems
• Dottie Sandusky in letter to judge: 'Jerry is not the monster'

Follow US news from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook

Jonathan Ernst / Reuters

Former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky and his wife, Dottie, afrrive at a courthouse for a pre-trial hearing in December.

The Common Pleas Court in McKean County, Pa., has released a letter that Dottie Sandusky wrote to Judge John Cleland after her husband, former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky, was convicted on 45 counts of child sex abuse and before he was sentenced to 30 to 60 years for those crimes.

Dottie Sandusky attended the sentencing Tuesday for her husband, who was defensive coordinator and for many years the presumed heir-apparent to legendary Penn State football coach Joe Paterno. The case shook the university, resulting in the firing of Paterno and the departure of the president and other officials.

More from Philadelphia's NBC10

Here is Dottie Sandusky's letter:

Dear Judge Cleland:

I am Dottie Sandusky, Jerry Sandusky's wife of 46 years in September. It is with a heavy heart I write this to you. I have known Jerry for 47 years and he has always been truthful with me, even if it hurt. He is a very up front man and a man of very high morals.

Jerry always put others before himself and always wanted to make each person feel special no matter who they were. Like all of us he has his faults, one is he cares so much for people always wanting them to reach their potential. Therefore he pushes them hard. One 42 year old man who was in the Second Mile stopped by the other day and told me how thankful he is to Jerry for pushing him to be the best he could be. He said, "What I learned from Jerry has made me a better husband and father." This is a young man who had many strikes against him.

Read the full sentencing order (.pdf) 

Jerry was a wonderful father to our six children. We thank God each day for bringing them into our life. He treated each one as if they were our biological children. Our house was a fun house with lots of games, picnics, laughs and caring. There were always lots of people around whether it was friends of our kids, Second Mile kids or neighbors.

I never saw him doing anything inappropriate to any child, if I had, as a Mother and Grandmother I would have taken action. Jerry is not the monster everyone is making him out to be.

Many times he would give up much of his free time, which was not many hours when he was a coach, to make a sporting event of one of the kids he was trying to help. Sometimes we would drive two hours to spend time with these kids.

Legal analysis: Sandusky sentencing was logical and reasonable 

One of the accusers called Jerry and said he could not do his school work because his computer broke and Jerry found a used computer that someone was not using and gave it to him. Fact is most of the things he gave to the accusers were used or given to him by people who wanted to help these young men.

I use to believe in our protective system, but now have no faith in the police or legal system. To think that they can lie and get by with the lies. The press has been unbelievable. People who have not met us are writing untruths.

As far as our son Matt goes, people need to know what kind of person he is. We have forgiven him many times for all he has done to our family thinking that he was changing his life, but he would always go back to his stealing and lies. He has been diagnose with Bipolar, but he refuses to take his medicine. He has had many run-ins with the law and stolen money and items from our family. We still love him and want the best for him, but because of his actions we cannot express this to him.

I pray each day that God will give me the strength to do what is right and that I will be able to hold our family together.

Thank you for listening.

Sincerely,

Dorothy D. Sandusky

Transcript: Full radio statement from Jerry Sandusky

Related: Audio of Sandusky's statement on Penn State student station

Jerry Sandusky made a surprise statement before his sentencing and also made a statement at the hearing, insisting that "I didn't do these alleged disgusting acts."

Sandusky said he had "hope in my heart for a brighter day, not knowing when that day will come."

"Many moments I have spent looking for a purpose," he said. "Maybe it will help others — some vulnerable children who may have been abused may not be as a result of all the publicity — but I'm not sure about it. I would hope that it would happen." 

This article includes reporting by Karen Araiza of Philadelphia's NBC10 and NBC News staff.

More content from NBCNews.com:

• Three dead after Florida parking garage collapse; 1 still missing
• Why did environmental nonprofit donate to conservative pro-coal group?
• Video: Drought brings skunks to golf course
• Doping agency claims proof of cheating by cyclist Armstrong
• Death of cockroach-eating contest winner in Florida puzzles experts

Follow US news from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook

Several victims of child sexual abuse by Jerry Sandusky are "satisfied" and "happy" to know that the former Penn State assistant football coach will almost certainly die in prison, their attorneys told NBC News on Tuesday.

Sandusky — who was defensive coordinator for Penn State's powerful football team for three decades — was sentenced to 30 to 60 years in prison Tuesday in Bellefonte, Pa., for abusing 10 boys he met over 15 years through his Second Mile charity for troubled children.

Sandusky, 68, could have faced more than 400 years for his convictions on 45 counts of child sexual abuse, but McKean County Common Pleas Court Judge John Cleland chose to follow state sentencing guidelines. Even with the shorter sentence, Cleland told Sandusky that the sentence means he will remain locked up "for the rest of your life."

That's the important thing, said Matt Casey, an attorney for Victims 3, 7 and 10, none of whom NBC News is identifying.

"They have confidence that Judge (John) Cleland took his obligations seriously," Casey said in an interview with NBC 10 of Philadelphia. "Jerry Sandusky is never going to get out of prison."

Casey acknowledged that the sentence was shorter than he had expected, saying, "If you walk through the individual accounts, there may be some sentences that we might take issue with."

Read the full sentencing order (.pdf)

But "the man is going to die in prison," he said. "That he will never be able to do this to anyone else probably was the most important part of this for our clients."

Jeffrey Fritz, the attorney for other victims — including the young man identified in the indictment as Victim 4, who angrily addressed Sandusky in court Tuesday — said the young man was "happy to know that Jerry Sandusky will live the rest of his life in prison."

Legal analysis: Sandusky sentencing was logical and reasonable

Ghosts of Sandusky's dreams haunt empty home where his charity was born

Victim 4 told Sandusky: "You should be ashamed, and those who covered up should be held accountable for your actions. I don't forgive you, and I don't know that I ever will."

Another of Sandusky's victims told the court that the sentencing "will never erase what he did to me — it will never make me whole. I will never erase his naked body against me.

"But he must pay for his crimes, which he has been properly been convicted of," the young man said.

Fritz told NBC News that all of the young men continue to undergo counseling, but he said it was time to stop calling them "victims."

Watch US News videos on NBCNews.com

"What's important to note today is these are victims that are transitioning into survivors, and they're no longer victims," he said. "They are doing what they can to move on with their life as best they can, despite the horror."

Correction: Jeffrey Fritz, an attorney for a victim in the Jerry Sandusky case, said it was time to stop calling the young men “victims.” An earlier version of this report incorrectly attributed the statement.  

More content from NBCNews.com:

• Jerry Sandusky gets 30 to 60 years for child sex abuse
• Cook County, Ill., considers 'violence tax' on guns, ammo
• 1 in 5 Americans is not religiously affiliated, survey finds
• Deadly crossing: Death toll rises among those desperate for American Dream
• Military suicides: Defense officials spending $10 million to learn if fish oil can help
• Florida man dies after winning cockroach-eating contest
• Video: Mexican authorities arrest suspect in tourist murder

Follow US news from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook

ANALYSIS

Courtrooms are in many ways public theaters. Parties come to court to resolve disputes, but there's another aspect to their work. They also show how the power of the state is appropriately used. When the conflicting parties are the state and a criminal defendant, courts explain why punishment is just. 

Wes Oliver is a law professor and director of the Criminal Justice Program at the Duquesne University School of Law.

In Bellefonte, Pa., on Tuesday we saw just that public function at work in Jerry Sandusky's sentencing hearing. The practical effect of any sentence Judge John Cleland could have handed down was not in doubt. It was clear going into this hearing that Sandusky would get life. 

The sentencing hearing was thus an opportunity for society to express its outrage at the crime committed, for the defendant to respond to the public, and for the judge to explain the sentence. 

Prosecutor Joe McGettigen and three of the victims very powerfully described the harm Sandusky inflicted. McGettigen spoke in a measured way, noting that Sandusky's roles at Penn State and with the Second Mile charity provided a cloak for his real goal of molesting children. 

The victims who spoke were all clearly emotional, but were measured in their combination of anger and sadness.  Their impact was profound, but not in a way that could have affected the sentence.  In some ways their statements had a more profound meaning than adding five, 10, or even 100 years to this life sentence. This forum provided them an opportunity to tell their abuser, with the support of the community and the apparatus of the state, how his crimes affected them.  This was a vehicle for them to express their outrage.  

This was also an opportunity for Sandusky to respond to the community's condemnation. His rambling remarks, however, appeared to be an unsuccessful effort by an emotionally unstable man to preserve his legacy. At one point Sandusky stated, "I've been kissed by dogs. I've been bitten by dogs." At another point he invoked both the words of Martin Luther King Jr., and the words of Scripture.  "I've been to the mountain top," he said.  "I've seen the valley of the shadow of death." At other times, he seemed to be spouting poetry about prison life.

Judge Cleland's remarks quite appropriately explained society's reasons for sentencing Sandusky as he did. His sentence needed to protect the community, reflect the gravity of the crimes, the defendant's hope for rehabilitation, and the effect of the crimes on the community. As expected, his sentence demonstrated his interest in appearing measured and thoughtful even in punishing a serious offender. Even speaking about a sentence of dozens of years for a 68 year old man was nonsensical, he noted, observing that there is "no place in the law for sentences to be an instrument of vengeance." 

But Cleland needed to express the community's outrage, which he did masterfully. He noted that Sandusky betrayed those who trusted him, that his crimes were an "assault to their psyches and souls." 

The entire proceeding struck exactly the right tone. Unlike the post-verdict celebration, Tuesday’s sentencing appropriately reflected the outrage of the victims and the community and left the impression that the legal process is one of logic and reason, not passion and vengeance.

More content from NBCNews.com:

• Jerry Sandusky gets 30 to 60 years for child sex abuse
• Cook County, Ill., considers 'violence tax' on guns, ammo
• 1 in 5 Americans are not religiously affiliated, survey finds
• Deadly crossing: Death toll rises among those desperate for American Dream
• Military suicides: Defense officials spending $10 million to learn if fish oil can help
• Florida man dies after winning cockroach-eating contest
• Video: Mexican authorities arrest suspect in tourist murder

Follow US news from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook

ANALYSIS

Jerry Sandusky's criminal trial did not draw the attention of the nation because there was some uncertainty about the outcome.  And though there is little reason to doubt he will be ordered to spend the rest of his life in prison when he is sentenced on Tuesday, our continuing interest in this case has little to do with the issues the court has to decide. 

Wes Oliver is a law professor and director of the Criminal Justice Program at the Duquesne University School of Law.

Based on the jury's finding of guilt on 45 of the 48 counts, the former Penn State defensive coordinator and founder of the Second Mile charity for underprivileged kids could be sentenced to a maximum of over 400 years. But the judge is not required to sentence him to anything near that. Six of the offenses carry mandatory minimums of 10 years. This does not, however, mean that Sandusky must receive a minimum of 60 years in jail.  The judge will have to determine whether Sandusky serves his sentence for these individual offenses concurrently -- meaning simultaneously -- or consecutively.

None of the other offenses has such a low-end boundary, so the 68-year-old Sandusky could theoretically be sentenced to as little as 10 years. 

Those unfamiliar with the criminal justice system often find it bizarre that a defendant could serve time for two or more crimes at once.  After all, a prisoner serving two 30-year sentences at the same time is being punished the same as a person serving the same sentence for a single crime.  Practical realities, however, require this common occurrence.  If defendants were not routinely able to serve sentences simultaneously, a very substantial number of prisoners would be serving life sentences for offenses far from the worst in our criminal codes.

Ex-Penn State football aide McQueary files $4M whistleblower lawsuit

Sentencing guidelines in many states like Pennsylvania instruct the judge on the appropriate sentence for each individual count. For instance, the judge is required to give Sandusky an indeterminant sentence of 10 to 20 years on the involuntary deviate sexual intercourse counts.  But judges in Pennsylvania, as is common throughout the country, have almost absolute discretion to determine whether the sentences for those counts will be served consecutively. So the judge's determination of which sentences should be served consecutively will thus be the single greatest factor determining the actual number of years Sandusky receives.

That means that Judge John Cleland has the discretion to give Sandusky a sentence that would permit him to be released after 10 years, just as he has the discretion to give him a sentence that could require him (in theory) to spend over 400 years in prison.  Given the number and seriousness of the counts, the lower end of this range seems improbable -- for any judge.

Stay informed with the latest headlines; sign up for our newsletter

For some judges, the upper end of this range would be an attractive option.  But anything greater than 25 years would mean a life sentence as a practical matter. In other words, Sandusky's life would not be changed, practically speaking, by adding another 375 years to a 25-year sentence.  A judge could see a multi-century sentence as a way to send a strong message to would-be child molesters without changing either a defendant's punishment of the state's cost of incarceration.  More cynically, a judge presiding over a case with this type of profile could see a multi-century sentence as a way to grab headlines and increase his reputation as someone who dealt severely with America's best-known serial pedophile.

But Cleland is not a grandstander.  We saw that time and again throughout the course of the criminal proceedings.  He thoughtfully considered defense motions.  Despite community pressure, he rejected a prosecution request that Sandusky not be permitted to sit on his back porch while out on bond.  His tone and demeanor were measured throughout one of the most closely watched criminal cases in the history of the country.  His sentence may approach the century mark, but a maximum sentence seems unlikely. 

Nothing about Cleland -- or the seriousness of the facts of this case -- suggests, however, that Sandusky will receive a sentence of less than 25 years.  And that means a life sentence.  So the only real question is how he will serve out that sentence.  The Department of Corrections makes this determination and thus has a much larger role than Cleland in determining what the rest of Jerry Sandusky's life will be like.

'Shameful': Sandusky victim sues Penn State

A battery of tests will be conducted to determine Sandusky's mental state, physical condition, his risk to others and the risk that others pose to him.  He will then be classified for a level of security – minimum, medium, close or maximum.  No one factor is determinative, though the serious nature of the offenses will certainly be a factor.  The availability of housing meeting his security level will determine his specific placement and in making that determination, there is no official policy to prefer a facility close to the inmate's family.  He could be placed anywhere in Pennsylvania.

The Department of Corrections will further have to determine whether measures are needed to protect Sandusky from other prisoners.  If inmates express concern for their safety, the department takes that into consideration. But  Sandusky has expressed a desire to be in the general population, at least at his present facility.  If there is a safety concern, he could be given an individual cell, but otherwise remain in the general population. Or he could be placed in what is known as a special needs facility.  In such facilities, there is greater supervision of the inmates due to their risk of victimization because of factors like age, or mental impairment.  He could also be placed in administrative segregation for his protection, which would amount to solitary confinement for 23 hours a day. The department does not, however, have a presumption that child sex offenders will be at risk for victimization merely because of their crimes.

The Department of Corrections, over the next month, not at Tuesday's sentencing hearing, will determine what the rest of Jerry Sandusky's life is like.  Just as the result of his trial was fairly certain, so is the practical result of his sentencing.  Practically, the few issues that remain relate only to the level of his custody and will not be affected by his sentence.

More US coverage from NBC News

It is not surprising, though, that there is still considerable interest in Tuesday's hearing.  Despite its foregone conclusion, Sandusky's trial drew an international audience.  Our interest in the legal proceedings against Sandusky was never really about the law at all.  The Bellefonte, Pa., courtroom provided merely a backdrop for our view of this human tragedy.  Tuesday's sentencing hearing provides the last glimpse that focuses on Sandusky's role in the tragedy.  Soon enough we will turn our attention, with the trial of Penn State officials, to the role of university officials and, as a context for understanding their actions, the part played legendary Penn State football Coach Joe Paterno in this tragedy.  

More content from NBCNews.com:

• 'They just decked the bride': Wild wedding melee caught on camera
• After police shooting of naked college student, mother asks why
• Video: School dinner is keeping some US children from going hungry
• How Border Patrol 'friendly fire' incident unfolded
• Plot to bomb 48 Okla. churches uncovered, police say
• Video: Rare spider creates web of controversy

Follow US news from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook

HARRISBURG, Pa. -- A young man who testified against Jerry Sandusky sued Penn State on Friday for its "deliberate and shameful" handling of complaints that the former assistant football coach behaved inappropriately and sexually toward boys.

The suit filed by the person known as Victim 1 at Sandusky's trial said university officials made deliberate decisions not to report Sandusky to authorities.

It described their actions as "a function of (Penn State's) purposeful, deliberate and shameful subordination of the safety of children to its economic self-interests, and to its interest in maintaining and perpetuating its reputation."

Craig Houtz / Reuters

Second Mile founder and assistant Penn State football coach Jerry Sandusky attends a Second Mile Easter egg hunt in State College, Pennsylvania, in this April 8, 1990 file photo.

The complaint was filed electronically in Philadelphia state court Friday night, Slade McLaughlin, a lawyer for Victim 1, told The Associated Press. The young man's initial accusations sparked the investigation that led to criminal charges against Sandusky and two university officials.

Sandusky, 68, was convicted in June of 45 criminal counts for sexual abuse of boys, both on and off campus. He awaits sentencing that will likely send him to prison for the rest of his life.

Penn State ex-president Graham Spanier: Freeh report on sex scandal is wrong

Victim 1 and his mother reported Sandusky to the boy's high school and the Clinton County child protective agency in November 2009. Their complaint triggered the state investigation that last year resulted in the criminal charges.

Former Penn State administrator Gary Schultz and athletic director Tim Curley, who is on leave, were charged with perjury and failure to report suspected child abuse. Both deny the allegations and are expected to go on trial in January.

Famed football coach Joe Paterno was fired. He died last January.

The suit draws heavily from court testimony, grand jury investigations and Penn State's own investigative report, conducted by former FBI director Louis Freeh. The report details how university officials handled the claims against Sandusky and Sandusky's behavior. Victim 1 is known as "John Doe C" in the complaint. The suit names no other defendants than the State College university.

Related content:

• Expert: Penn state report ups legal risk for former president
• Penn state report: What it says about Sandusky's associates
• Penn state faces more fallout from sex abuse scandal

University spokesman Dave La Torre said the school has no comment on the pending litigation.

"The university takes these cases very seriously," La Torre said, adding that the current president and board "have publicly emphasized that their goal is to find solutions that rest on the principle of justice for the victims."

The suit claimed that a "special relationship" between Penn State and The Second Mile, a Sandusky-founded charity for youth, gave Sandusky a respectable public image and connections that enabled him to perform criminal acts.

It alleged "(Penn State) believed its reputation and economic interests would be adversely impacted if the public learned that a man closely associated with the school's football program was, in fact, a pedophile."

The Second Mile's future remains uncertain, subject to a legal dispute.

'Numerous victims'
According to the lawsuit, Victim 1 met Sandusky about eight years ago, when the boy was 11 and a first-year participant in a camp sponsored by The Second Mile. In his second year, the boy drew Sandusky's attention and accepted invitations to spend nights at the coach's State College home and to attend professional sports events, the suit said.

Over a three-year period ending in 2008, the suit said, Sandusky assaulted the boy more than 100 times, including fondling and oral sex. The lawsuit claims Sandusky attacked "numerous victims over a span of 30 years," but noted that his criminal trial was limited to a 15-year period and 10 victims.

Following Victim 1's testimony, Sandusky was convicted of all six counts that related to him, including involuntary deviate sexual intercourse for instances of oral sex.

The suit alleged negligence, fraudulent concealment, intentional infliction of emotional distress and civil conspiracy. It said Victim 1 has suffered physical and emotional injuries and will likely need medical and psychological help well into his future. The suit seeks compensatory and punitive damages.

Another Sandusky accuser has filed a federal lawsuit related to the scandal and a second victim has filed a court notice that he will file complaint. Lawyers have suggested others may take legal action.

More content from NBCNews.com:

• 2 dead, 9 injured in shooting near Empire State Building
• Panel calls for better care, protections for wounded troops
• Report offers a roadmap for America's national parks
• Undocumented mom risks life in US to join immigration fight
• Video: Did ex-SEAL sell out with bin Laden tell-all?
• Video: Missing teen escapes from captor of two years

Follow US News from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook

Gene Puskar / AP

Former Penn State President Graham Spanier walks on the field in 2011 before an NCAA college football game in State College, Pa.

The former president of Pennsylvania State University, Graham Spanier, has written a letter to the university trustees denying he shielded Jerry Sandusky, the child molesting assistant football coach.

Spanier rebuts the claim in the university-sponsored report by Louis Freeh, the former FBI director, that Spanier and other officials enabled Sandusky's crimes to continue and failed to show empathy for the victims. Spanier also says that he himself was the victim of abuse as a child and would never cover up or defend such action. He doesn't specify what kind of abuse he suffered, but he has previously described being beaten by his father; his attorney said Spanier was not referring to sexual abuse.

"It is unfathomable and illogical to think that a respected family sociologist and family therapist," Spanier wrote, "someone who personally experienced massive and persistent abuse as a child, someone who devoted a significant portion of his career to the welfare of children and youth, including service on the boards of four such organizations, two as chair of the board, would have knowingly turned a blind eye to any report of child abuse or predatory sexual acts directed at children. As I have stated in the clearest possible terms, at no time during my presidency did anyone ever report to me that Jerry Sandusky was observed abusing a child or youth or engaged in a sexual act with a child or youth.

"Had I known then what we now know about Jerry Sandusky, had I received any information about a sexual act in the shower or elsewhere, or had I had some basis for a higher level of suspicion about Sandusky, I would have strongly and immediately intervened," Spanier wrote. "Never would I stand by for a moment to allow a child predator to hurt children. I am personally outraged that any such abusive acts could have occurred in or around Penn State and have considerable pain that it could perhaps have been ended had we known more sooner."

ESPN has published the full letter, first reported by The Patriot-News, which is available here.

Spanier's lawyer, Peter Vaira, told the Associated Press on Tuesday that Spanier received regular "disciplinary beatings" by his father, and had to have his nose straightened several times. Vaira said the abuse was never sexual. 

The Freeh report faulted Spanier, citing a long email trail showing he was informed of the 1998 investigation and the 2001 incident.

"By not promptly and fully advising the Board of Trustees about the 1998 and 2001 child sexual abuse allegations against Sandusky and the subsequent Grand Jury investigation of him, Spanier failed his duties as President," the report says.

The report said that "the avoidance of the consequences of bad publicity" was the most significant cause for the failure to protect child victims and report abuse to authorities.

More coverage:

• The Freeh report: What it says about Penn State officials
• Freeh report increases the legal risks for Spanier
• Analysis: Paterno could've been indicted if he'd lived
• Report: Paterno, others hid Sandusky sexual abuse

Click here to sign up to receive our Top News email each day.

Spanier describes the 1998 and 2001 incidents

In his letter to the trustees, Spanier makes several specific rebuttals to the Freeh report.

First, Spanier says he thought that a 1998 investigation of Sandusky was being appropriately handled:

"I was apparently copied on two emails in 1998, the first, from Gary Schultz to Tim Curley on May 6 saying that 'the Public Welfare people will interview the individual Thursday.' The second email, from Schultz to Curley on June 9, says 'They met with Jerry on Monday and concluded that there was no criminal behavior and the matter was closed as an investigation. He was a little emotional and expressed concern as to how this might have adversely affected the child. I think the matter has been appropriately investigated and I hope it is now behind us.' I have no recollection of any conversations on the topic or any other emails from that era sent to me or by me. It is public knowledge that the District Attorney decided there was no crime to pursue. I don’t understand how one could conclude from such evidence 'concealment' of a known child predator."

Then Spanier provides more information about a 2001 incident in which coaching assistant Mike McQueary reported seeing Sandusky nude with a boy in a shower. He says university officials Tim Curley and Gary Schultz assured him that the information was not reported as a sexual incident, a sex act, but  as one that appeared inappropriate, "horsing around" nude in the shower:

"I can assure you that I hadn’t the slightest inkling until reading the Grand Jury presentment that Sandusky was being investigated for more than a single incident in a shower in 2001, something that was described to me only as 'horsing around.'

"I never heard a word about abusive or sexual behavior, nor were there any other details presented that would have led me to think along those lines. McQueary’s name was never mentioned to me, and it is clear that Curley and Schultz had not spoken to him yet when they gave me their initial heads up. I was in fact told that the witness wasn’t sure what he saw, since it was around a corner. Dr. Jonathan Dranov’s Grand Jury and trial testimony appear to corroborate that nothing sexual was reported to him in his meeting with McQueary on the night of the 2001 incident."

Spanier also says that he shared with the trustees what he knew in 2011, when Sandusky was being investigated by a grand jury, but that the university's general counsel kept him mostly in the dark.

Detail on the 2001 incident
Spanier supplemented his letter with details on the information he says he received about the 2001 incident in the shower. Here is his account in full:

Initial Heads Up

More than a decade ago, Tim Curley and Gary Schultz asked to catch me after another meeting to give me a “heads up” about a matter. Looking back at my calendar for what is now presumed to be February, 2001, I surmise that meeting to have been on Monday, February 12, at about 2:30pm, following a scheduled meeting of the President’s Council. It was common that members of the council would catch me individually for brief updates following such meetings.

The meeting lasted perhaps 10-15 minutes. Curley and Schultz shared that they had received a report that a member of the athletic department staff had reported something to Joe Paterno, and that Joe had passed that report on to Tim and Gary. The report was that Jerry Sandusky was seen in an athletic locker room facility showering with one of his Second Mile youth, after a workout, and that they were “horsing around” (or “engaged in horseplay”). It was reported that the staff member was not sure what he saw because it was around a corner and indirect.

I recall asking two questions:

“Are you sure that is how it was described to you, as horsing around”? Both replied “yes.”

“Are you sure that that is all that was reported?” Both replied “yes.”

We then agreed that we were uncomfortable with such a situation, that it was inappropriate, and that we did not want it to happen again. I asked that Tim meet with Sandusky to tell him that he must never again bring youth into the showers. We further agreed that we should inform the Second Mile president that we were we directing Jerry to never do this again and furthermore that we did not wish Second Mile youth to be in our showers.

Notes:

There was no mention of anything abusive, sexual, or criminal.

At no time was it said who had made the report to Joe Paterno. (I never heard Mike McQuery’s name associated with this episode until November 7, 2011, when I read it in a newspaper story.)

The hour of the day was not mentioned.

The specific building and locker room were not mentioned.

The age of the child was not mentioned. I had presumed it was a high school age child under Jerry’s guardianship or sponsorship, since that is all I knew about the Second Mile.

There was no mention of any prior shower incident, and I had no recollection of having heard of a prior incident.

Follow Up

In reviewing my calendar for February, 2001, I note a double entry for Sunday, February 25. I had been out of town for several days and was scheduled to return in time to see a Penn State women’s basketball game at 2pm. My assistant noted on the calendar that I should stop in to see Tim Curley briefly in my way into the game. I have no recollection of that meeting other than that Tim was worried about how he shouldhandle things if he informed Sandusky that we were forbidding him from bringing Second Mile youth into our facilities and then Sandusky disagreed with this directive. I do not recall knowing about any prior incidents, but it is apparent from emails recently released to the media that Tim also indicated that there had been an earlier occasion when Sandusky had showered with a minor. We also now know that I was copied on two emails in 1998 that may have alerted me to that (the first one being a vague reference with no individual named) and the second essentially saying that the matter had been closed. I had absolutely no recollection of that history in 2001 nor do I recall it today. I don’t believe I replied to those emails nor was I briefed verbally.

Tim Curley sent me a follow up email that has recently been shared with the news media. My use of the word “humane” refers specifically and only to my thought that it was humane of Tim to wish to inform Sandusky first and to allow him to accompany Tim to the meeting with the president of the Second Mile. Moreover, it would be humane to offer counseling to Sandusky if he didn’t understand why this was inappropriate and unacceptable to us. My comment that we could be vulnerable for not reporting it further relates specifically and only to Tim’s concern about the possibility that Jerry would not accept our directive and repeat the practice. Were that the outcome of his discussion I would have worried that we did not enlist more help in enforcing such a directive. I suggested that we could visit that question down the road, meaning after Curley informed Sandusky of our directive and learning of his willingness to comply.

A few days after the brief Sunday interaction, I saw Tim Curley and he reported that both of the discussions had taken place, that those discussions had gone well and our directive accepted, and that the matter was closed.

I never heard another word about this from any individual until I learned of the investigation into Sandusky. I was eager to assist the attorney general and was completely honest to the best of my recollection. I had absolutely no idea until midway through my voluntary grand jury testimony that this inquiry was about anything more than the one episode in the shower.

Notes:

I do not recall that I was privy to any follow up discussions between Curley, Schultz, legal counsel, or others. I had five out of town trips that month, my appropriations hearings, THON, a packed calendar with 164 appointments, an average of 100 incoming and 50 outgoing emails a day, and the turmoil of the Black Caucus disruption and the takeover of the student union.

I do not recall being involved in any discussions about DPW or the police, although I now assume that DPW is the “other organization” being referenced by Curley and Schultz in their emails.

Former Penn State University President Graham Spanier is no longer fighting for access to his old university emails dealing with convicted child sex abuser Jerry Sandusky.

Court documents filed Wednesday show Spanier dropped a lawsuit that sought release of the emails, the Associated Press reported.

Spanier originally filed suit in May, wanting access to his university emails from 1998 to 2004 in order to prepare before speaking with investigators from the team led by former FBI Director Louis Freeh, who was hired by the university's board of trustees, according the Centre Daily Times. But Penn State lawyers worried that giving Spanier access would compromise the investigation.

No reason was cited for Spanier's decision to drop lawsuit but the issue now appears moot because Freeh issued his report last week. 

Spanier's actions -- or lack thereof -- are out in the open now: He is not charged with any crime, according to the AP, although his leadership was criticized in the Freeh report. The 267-page report found that top university officials, including Spanier, could have prevented the sex abuse by Sandusky from continuing. The report found officials wanted to avoid bad publicity and concealed the allegations of abuse.

Watch US News videos on NBCNews.com

The emails revealed in the Freeh investigation are quite damning: One of Spanier's emails to university administrators from 2001 said it would be "humane" to approach Sandusky rather than going to authorities, the Centre Daily Times reported, but he worried they could be vulnerable if they kept quiet.

Sandusky was convicted last month of abusing 10 boys over 15 years. He could face up to 373 years in prison.

More content from NBCNews.com:

• No criminal charges for military in Secret Service scandal
• Panetta: US won't allow Iran to shut down Strait of Hormuz
• Lesbian mom on Boy Scouts: We'll keep fighting
• Man writes own obituary, surprising friends, family
• Healing war veterans' wounded spirits behind bars
• Illegal immigrant shot by US agent recounts desert 'terror'
• Video: Former cheerleader accused of sexual abuse speaks out

Follow US News from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook

Gene J. Puskar / AP

The statue of former Penn State University head football coach Joe Paterno stands outside Beaver Stadium in State College, Pa.

A small plane flew around the Penn State campus in State College, Pa., on Tuesday with a banner urging that the school dismantle the statue of football coach Joe Paterno.

"Take the statue down or we will," the banner said.

The incident follows the release Thursday of former FBI Director Louis Freeh's report that accused Paterno of helping to cover up child abuse by assistant coach Jerry Sandusky.

And it comes on a day when Brown University, Paterno's alma mater, said it was taking his name off an annual athletic award, and a Penn State student group that manages a rallying spot for the Nittany Lions' football games changed the spot's name from "Paternoville" to "Nittanyville."

National Sky Ads, the Long Island-based company that flew the banner, told NBC News that the person who hired them is "a concerned citizen" who "takes offense to certain things." The owner, who only wanted to be identified as "Ted," confirmed that this was the same person who hired an airplane banner poking fun at Tiger Woods in 2010.

The plane is registered to Ohio-based Air America Aerial Ads, according to the Centre Daily Times. The operator of that plane, James Miller, would not identify his client, but told the Centre Daily Times that he believes in the freedom of speech.

Related: Middle school to remove Paterno mural following Freeh report

A Penn State spokesman, David La Torre, confirmed the banner's appearance but had no further information.

In an interview Tuesday with WJAC-TV, Penn State President Rodney Erickson said top university officials are looking into what, if anything to do with the 7-foot statue of Paterno, which stands outside Beaver Stadium.

“We're obviously also hearing from members of the Penn State community and far beyond. Obviously, Joe Paterno was a legend. He had a very important influence on the university for many years, so we need to look at in a comprehensive kind of fashion the things that coach Paterno did that were supportive of our educational efforts and other things,” Erickson said.

“Obviously, as the Freeh report indicates, there were clearly very bad judgments that were made along the way with respect to the Sandusky matter and that will forever be a mark against Joe's contributions.”

Watch US News videos on NBCNews.com

He added: “So we need some time to separate out the positive kinds of things with respect to education, as well as the things that would serve as a very negative reminder of the consequences of possibilities of what transpired here at the university.”

Last month, Sandusky was convicted of abusing 10 boys over 15 years, and he could face up to 373 years in prison. The Freeh report found four top university officials including Paterno, who died in January of lung cancer, could have prevented the sex abuse from continuing.

In the WJAC-TV interview, Erickson also said he’s still counting on the university’s insurance policies to cover the cost of settling lawsuits arising from the Sandusky scandal.

“At this point, we're counting on insurance funding and the other sources of funding that we identified earlier in the year, which is funds that were derived from loans - interests on loans to self-supporting units within the university - including the Department of Intercollegiate Athletics.”

He said no taxpayer, donor or tuition money would be used to pay any settlements.

Erickson also said in the interview that the university would soon submit a response to questions from the NCAA, which is considering sanctions against the school’s sports programs.

NCAA President Mark Emmert said the Penn State sex abuse scandal was so egregious that he would not rule out applying the so-called "death penalty" to the university – the cancellation of an entire football season.

Asked in an interview on PBS's Tavis Smiley show Monday night about such a severe sanction, Emmert said: "I don't want to take anything off the table. The fact is this is completely different than ... anything else we have dealt with."

"I don't know that past precedent makes particularly good sense in this case," Emmert said.

Once Penn State responds to the NCAA's letter, the organization will decide whether to press charges against the college.

Reuters contributed to this report.

More content from NBCNews.com:

• US tough on saving elephants from slaughter? Hardly, says WWF
• Uncloaked: Army testing new camo to replace flawed design
• 'No relief' from drought as heat returns to Midwest, Northeast
• Boy Scouts: We're keeping policy banning gays
• Video: Bus driver catches girl, 7, in three-story plunge

Follow US News from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook