Jerry Sandusky

FILE - In this Oct. 9, 2012 file photo, former Penn State University assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky, center, is taken from the Centre County Courthouse by Centre County Sheriff Denny Nau, left, and a deputy, after being sentenced in Bellefonte, Pa. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke, File)

Discretion, judgment, the power of the prosecutor to determine the best course of action, including, on occasion, the decision not to prosecute at all, has been at the core of Kathleen Kane's tenure.

She came into office questioning Tom Corbett's and has felt the heat as others question her own.

Kane rose to state office questioning Corbett decisions that lengthened the time it took to put convicted child molester Jerry Sandusky behind bars.

Kane herself has since been the focus of public opprobrium for her decision not to prosecute Philadelphia-area lawmakers caught on tape taking cash bribes.

Now a report on Kane's investigation into Corbett's handling of the Sandusky investigation reportedly exonerates the governor.

A man who once sat in the attorney general's chair himself says it's all about discretion — the latitude a prosecutor has to decide what to pursue and how to do it.

Walter Cohen, former Pa. attorney general

Walter Cohen knows what it's like.

Cohen served as attorney general immediately after his boss, Ernie Preate Jr., pleaded guilty to federal felony charges in 1995.

Shortly after Cohen took office, a grand jury convened by Preate to investigate a state representative chairing a House committee that was investigating Preate returned a report that recommended the representative be criminally charged.

The recommended charges against the representative were "all based on the word of one woman who worked for him, who alleged he had assaulted her," said Cohen.

"The toughest decision is the one not to prosecute," Cohen said. "I reviewed the entire grand jury report in detail, and I felt there was not sufficient evidence, given what was going to come before the jury about the prior attorney general" and the representative's investigation.

Cohen said, "I didn't feel there was sufficient evidence from that one woman to convict him."

That was Cohen's judgment, his exercise of discretion.

Discretion also can be a lightning rod for public criticism.

In Cohen's case, he said he felt exonerated more than two years later, when the Philadelphia Inquirer reported that the woman who had accused the representative, and on whose evidence the entire prosecution would have rested, was reportedly back working in the representative's office.

Cohen equated the discretion of a prosecutor to the pardon power of the executive.

Think of President Gerald Ford pardoning Richard Nixon.

"It was Ford's determination that it was best for the country to get it all behind us," said Cohen. "You can disagree or agree, but the ultimate standard for the prosecutor is doing justice and what is in the public interest."

Cohen also has followed the Sandusky case closely and has been a regular commenter on the saga.

Several of Corbett's decisions as attorney general — including the decision not to move forward on the testimony of just one victim and the decision to employ a grand jury — resulted in the Sandusky investigation taking longer than some — notably Kane — later thought appropriate.

But context and notoriety are factors any prosecutor must take into account.

"The decision made in the attorney general's office that they needed the word of more than one kid — that is the discretion of the prosecutor," said Cohen.

Those who question it should contemplate the case of Mike McQueary, he said.

McQueary, Cohen noted, is a 6-foot-4, 240 pound, former Division 1 quarterback who was serving as a graduate assistant to Joe Paterno's football team who testified that he witnessed Sandusky assaulting a young boy in the Penn State showers.

"He comes upon the scene in the locker room with Sandusky and a 10-year-old boy, and what does he do? He walks out, goes home and asks his father what he should do. He doesn't go grab Sandusky off this kid. Why? His defense has been that Sandusky was an icon. He was a legend," Cohen said.

"Even McQueary, who could have torn Sandusky limb for limb, walks out to avoid dealing with Sandusky because he's an icon."

Cohen said, "Tom Corbett has said something similar. He said you can't take one 10-year-old kid and try to put an icon in prison for life. You need to build a case."

Consider the acquittal of O.J. Simpson, Cohen said: "Everybody knows what happened there. He's an icon. The jury decided there wasn't enough evidence."

In the end, Cohen said, Sandusky was convicted on 45 of 48 counts.

If the media reports are accurate that Kane's report exonerates Corbett, Cohen said, "the conclusion doesn't surprise me mainly because it seems to be no one was hurt during the investigation."

"As a result of what Corbett decided to do and the length of time it took, was anybody hurt by it? As far as we know, there wasn't any boy who came forward who said he was assaulted in that time. I assume Sandusky knew he was being watched," he said.

Cohen said the delay results in a conviction and "no harm, no foul" as far as any further predation by Sandusky.

Cohen noted that Jeff Moulton, the specially appointed lead of the investigation into Corbett, has "a really exceptional reputation, and he certainly took his own time."

As for Kane's own subsequent troubles for having decided not to prosecute the Philly lawmakers after discovering the confidential informant and primary witness in the bribery case had been given a get out of jail free card by a former deputy prosecutor, Cohen said: "I have struggled myself to think of a case where a prosecutor totally dropped charges against an individual in return for their help in an investigation.

"I'm sure it was her concern an agreement was reached in December of 2012 to set [the confidential informant] free and how is that going to set with a jury?

"That's discretion," he said.

"If you can't make tough decisions, go into another line of work."