and quote, the truth is not out there fully. i didn't just turn and run. i made sure it stopped. and quote, i had to make quick, tough decisions. that e-mail obtained last tuesday. here's what he told cbs news' armen keteyian today. >> do you have any idea when you might be ready to talk? >> this process has to play out. i don't have anything else to say. >> just one last thing. just describe your emotions right now. >> all over the place. just kind of shaken. >> crazy? >> crazy. >> you said what, like a -- >> snow globe. >> now, the exclusive only on 360, the first clear answer to how penn state has been able to put up a virtual wall of silence about what jerry sandusky allegedly did to one of the kids from his second mile charity back in 1998. victim 6's allegations triggered a multiagency investigation that somehow ended both without charges and without any knowledge of the part on penn state head coach joe paterno. turns out the wall is a legal one. it allows penn state, which is a taxpayer funded university to keep things from the public, pertinent facts about what did or didn't happen to children inside this athletic building and other. facts about what university officials including joe paterno did or didn't know and whether anyone tried to cover things up. drew griffin has that. he joins us shortly. first, what the district attorney is saying about the charges, 40 of them so far, showing a pattern of serial child sex abuse. sandusky spoke out last night to nbc's bob costas. >> what did happen in the shower the night that mike mcqueary happened upon you and the young boy? >> okay. we were showering, and horsing around. and he actually turned all the showers on and was actually sliding across the floor, and we were, az recall, possibly like snapping a towel, horseplay. >> now, here's what he said to the logical and very direct follow-up. >> you are a pedophile? >> no. >> are you sexually attracted to young boys, to underaged boys? >> am i sexually attracted to underaged boys? >> yes. >> sexually attracted -- you know, i enjoy young people. i love to be around them. i -- i -- but no, i'm not sexually attracted to young boys. >> the tone, the delayed denial, sandusky sounds like a man under a lot of strain. here's what sandusky's lawyer said about the alleged 2002 rape. >> we expect we're going to have a number of kids -- now how many of those so-called eight kids, we're not sure. but we anticipate we're going to have at least several of those kids come forward and say, this never happened. this is me. this is the allegation. it never occurred. in fact, one of the toughest allegations that mcqueary violations, what mcqueary said he saw, we have information that that child says that never happened. >> that, of course, remains to be seen. so does coach mcqueary's claim in his e-mail that he tried to stop what he saw that day in the shower. what's on the record is what the grand jury report says, that jerry sandusky was seen raping a 10-year-old boy. it goes on to say that he first spoke with his father, then joe paterno and top university officials. it was then that paterno said he learned of the investigation about his friend jerry sandusky. our fruitless efforts to find out more about his claim that he knew nothing back then or pennsylvania's public disclosure law that let penn state avoid answering our questions and dodge public accountability. drew griffin of cnn's special investigations unit joins us with that. the question we've been trying to get to is who knew what and when and especially in 1998 when his own defensive coordinate was being intensely questioned by investigators if joe paterno knew, the college state police, child services were investigating jerry sandusky for alleged child molestation. the records that point to that in university files, aren't there? >> should be. that type of information commonly found in usual public records accessible, anderson, at a public institution on who knew what and when. but as you pointed out, penn state and three other schools in this state granted an exemption to releasing records. just put this in perspective. in 2007/2008 there was another investigation into more allegations against sandusky and the state's new open records chief says that was the exact time that penn state specifically penn state's president went to the legislature to make sure their records would be kept secret. >> what that means in essence is that while every other commonwealth agency, governor's office, police departments, townships, school districts, are subject to this law and would be required to provide public record, penn state is exempt. that came as a result of a series of lobbying efforts through the house of representatives that was taking a look at rewriting pennsylvania's right to know law, which was really among the worst in the nation. and at that jeng tuncture, the president of penn state was one of the key lobbyists testifying seeking an exemption for penn state. >> drew, do we know why the president of penn state wanted this exemption that was around the time of this investigation? >> we know what graham spanier told the legislature. he was concerned, he said, about costs, about compliance, about competitive reasons for keeping records. also privacy. but i asked terry mutschler if she thinks the real reason was to hide a damaging investigation? >> i think that view would be shared by open records advocates. if you were at any of the police departments in the commonwealth, incident reports are, in fact, available under the right to know law. penn state, because it enjoys, along with temple, pitt, lincoln and this exception, they are not subject. >> so the exemption to release the records doesn't mean they can't just release it. isn't there any one on the campus willing to open the records to show what they knew, who knew what and when? >> yeah. you're spot on, anderson. they could if they wanted to, but when we went to try to find those records, literally going to detectives' homes who were involved in this, to the schools, to the police department, instead of getting any records, we were sent this letter. this is from the university attorney denying us any access to these records based solely on the exemption penn state has. in fact, the current police chief of the university wouldn't come out and talk to us in person. he was just behind a wall, we could hear him, but telling us over a phone that everyone in his department would not answer a single question. right, and you know, they're not telling us anything. you can imagine my frustration. usually we go to a police department and we get public records every single place i've ever been to. that's what i don't understand particularly about penn state because these records that are normally available at seemingly every police department i've ever been to in the united states of america, they're not released here, which would answer a lot of our questions. didn't answer a single question, anderson. the open records chief in this state says no doubt if this were anywhere but penn state, the public would know who knew what and when. >> let's just, you know, do a flat comparison. if this were an investigation involving another university, say east stroudsburg university that did have a scandal at its doorstep, they were subject to the right to know law. you were able to obtain in that situation e-mails, copies of incident reports of the police department. any kind of policies that came out with the board of trustees, that would all be available. at penn state, however, that's off limits. >> anderson, i do want to point out we did place a call to the home of the former president of penn state, graham spanier, like almost everyone else here, he is not talking. >> i want to bring in our legal panel, jeffrey toobin, former prosecutor sunny hostin, legal contributor for tru tv. and what do you think of the fact that they lobbied to keep these records private. >> universities never need an excuse to want more secrecy. they had an opportunity and a they took it. >> it's a public institution. >> it is, but so is the government and it fights disclosure all the time. this is just the natural reaction of people who can get away with secrecy when they can, they do. >> and this is important, sunny, because if these reports -- if we had access to these records, we could know a lot more about these investigations against sandusky. >> no question, the public wants to know. the public should know. we should mention that law enforcement authorities are privy to this information is always my understanding when you're talking about the freedom of information. but you know, sex abuse thrives, especially child sex abuse, on secrecy and embarrassment and privacy. i think that is what is so scary about penn state's position in this because it allowed, i think, for these types of things to happen. >> mark, i want to play some of sandusky's interview with nbc news with bob costas. >> i can say that i have done some of those things. i have horsed around with kids. i have showered after workouts. i have hugged them and i have touched their leg without intent of sexual contact, but so if you look at it that way, there are things that -- that wouldn't -- you know, would be accurate. >> mark, why do you think he's making this statement now? especially with specifics like touched their leg, which is what others -- what other young people have come forward and said that sandusky did to them even if there wasn't abuse involved. why do you think he's saying this now? >> well, there's one explanation. i can just say if this was my client i would have hit him over the head with a 2 by 4 before going on the air. it does cut both ways in this sense. this is one of the supersized cases. they are under a tidal wave of presumption of guilt, so they're trying something unorthodox. and this is clearly unorthodox, and trying to stop that somehow. i guess they figure -- and this is the only explanation i can come up with -- if we get something out there, this is a way the prosecutors may use it as you've seen all the people wall-to-wall using it today with his hesitation, if they use it at trial, maybe he doesn't have to take the stand, he doesn't have to be cross-examined. that's, i guess, the explanation for it. it is somewhat puzzling, i give you that. >> jeff, i didn't understand when sandusky's attorney has said -- and he said it a couple times -- that he believes some of these eight victims who are identified as victims in the grand jury report, that he believes they will come forward saying nothing happened. >> that is certainly surprising given the grand jury report because presumably, although they are only identified by number, they have been interviewed. some of them, as far as i'm aware, i think perhaps particularly the one in the shower with mcqueary, i don't think the authorities know who that is at this point. so there may be some confusion about that. but i guess they are counting on the fact that sandusky says, go ahead, ask this kid whether it happened and he'll say no. i'd be surprised if that were the case because obviously the government would have already spoken to them. but i mean, it is kind of baffling. >> certainly by not reporting this in 2002, the alleged incident that happened in 2002 to police, is the university liable here? >> i think so. i think there's certainly civil exposure. we'll see a wave of lawsuits. i think everyone will agree with me. >> enormous. enormous. >> it's going to happen. my hope is that what comes out of this, anderson, is that there will be tightening of regulations, protocols put in place, that people will start talking about these issues. because again people don't want to talk about them. people are so uncomfortable, but that enables these predators and these pedophiles to continue doing business as usual. and we have to put a stop to it. if you see something, you have to say something. >> mark, more alleged victim of sandusky coming forward. "new york times" saying ten new claim of sexual abuse. sandusky is clearly saying he didn't abuse anyone. what kind of defense can he mount in court against increasing claims? i guess do you take them one by one? >> well, look, first of all, when we start talking about people as predators and everything else, that assumes guilt. i just want to start off with, look, all this is is a grand jury or the testimony that's been filtered by the prosecution that was supposedly in front of a grand jury that was not cross-examined, that there was nothing else in there except their presentation. so before we start assuming all of these things, let's just take a deep breath. in terms of a defense, they've already started this defense. and you've seen kind of them roll it out already. and i would not be so sure that the person who claims that he saw something in that shower, he's already starting to equivocate. if they come up with somebody who was in that shower and said that was me and nothing happened, then you're going to tart to see the focus shift of why did this guy mcqueary say all of these things? i know it's easy and great to jump on the bandwagon here, but remember, this is nothing more than the prosecution presenting allegations. there will be a judge at some point that will tell a jury, you can tear this document up. it has no meaning whatsoever. >> are we to assume, though, mark -- >> before we start saying we've got victims, because victim is a legally charged term meaning that somebody is guilty, we've got complaining witnesses, we've got a prosecution document. why don't we just hold off for a second and see what we really have here once it's tested by cross-examination? >> mark, again, you did this last night, he raised this very valid point because there's been many cases, the mcmartin preschool. >> that's like comparing apples to -- >> but in that case you had. >> that's a different case. >> you had 60 -- >> that's a very different case, everyone. let's be honest. >> it was a very different case. >> we're talking about child interviews suggestibility. that's very different, mark, from -- >> but the defense. >> including adults coming forward. >> what we've -- >> that's based on what you know now. the defense can very well allege the same thing is happening here. >> this is a very different case. you can't compare the two. >> jeff? >> i think you can compare them. as you look forward to see what might happen. i mean, this is what a good defense attorney can do. a good defense attorney can say, wait a minute, as mark is doing, let's wait for the evidence to come in. we have seen false charges in these cases before. that is a very appropriate thing for a defense attorney to say. putting your client out, admitting to being in the shower is nuts. i don't know why he did that. there was a reasonable role for a defense attorney here, but this was not reasonable. >> we've got to end it there. jeff, mark geragos, always good to have you, sunny as well. try to get a lot of different viewpoints on this program. let us know what you think. we're on facebook, google plus, add us to your circle. follow me on twitte twitter @andersoncooper. why this scandal is taking over the headlines and why it is seen as such a betrayal far beyond the headlines of sports. later raw politics. herman cain repeating some amazing claims about muslims in america being extremists. we're going to tell you what he said and show you what the facts say. let's first check in with isha. >> after months coming out in a manhattan park, a judge rules against occupy wall street. but you can see that protesters aren't exactly going away. so what happens next? actually, we guarantee we'll give you the difference if you find any lower. oh, you'll guarantee it? i guarantee it. i guarantee it. i guarantee it. i guarantee it. got it. [ male announcer ] more christmas for your money. guaranteed. ♪ the other office devices? they don't get me. they're all like, "hey, brother, doesn't it bother you that no one notices you?" and i'm like, "doesn't it bother you you're not reliable?" and they say, "shut up!" and i'm like, "you shut up." in business, it's all about reliability. 'cause these guys aren't just hitting "print." they're hitting "dream." so that's what i do. i print dreams, baby. [whispering] big dreams. so far tonight you've heard jerry sandusky describe what happened in a shower with a 10-year-old as horseplay. his lawyer says that's what jocks do. you saw mike mcqueary try to redefine call my father as i stepped in and stopped it when talking about what he did. tonight's breaking news t associated press is now reporting that he's also claiming, mcqueary is also claiming by e-mail that he actually went to police. he's also speaking for the first time on camera since this story broke ten days ago. here's an exchange with cbs' armen keteyian. >> do you have any idea when you might be ready to talk? >> this process has to play out. i just don't have anything else to say. >> okay. then just one last thing. just describe your emotions right now. >> all over the place. just kind of shaken. >> crazy? >> crazy. >> you said what, like a -- >> snow globe. >> again, now, if this new report by the ap is correct, then mcqueary has claimed in an e-mail that he actually went to police, that would be a significant change up until now what was in the grand jury report and what many people were led to believe. there was no indication up until this e-mail that the ap is reporting that mcqueary had gone to the police. we don't know the details in this. obviously, now that we have this, we're going to try to check police records, if possible. but as we just saw with drew griffin, we're not getting anywhere with campus police. it's not clear, too, if he went to campus police or city police or state police. again, we'll try to follow up with more information on that. a jury's going to decide. obviously, sandusky's claim. you can decide whether or not to believe mcqueary's story. coaches aren't to horse around naked in showers accompanied by minors if that's what it was. and athletic bystanders are supposed to protect kids against naked elderly predators, period. head coaches are supposed to live up to their moral code. and public universities are supposed to be open with the public. not these days. christine brennan is writing about it in the pages of "usa today." and the award winning author of "friday night lights." christine, there's a report from cbs news citing the associated press, quote, in the e-mail dated november 8th from mcqueary's penn state account and made available to the associated press by his friend on tuesday, the assistant coach writes that his stopped the sexual assault and discussed it with police afterward. that is clearly a big disconnect from what we've heard before which is in the grand jury report that mcqueary didn't go to police. what did you make of this? >> clearly mcqueary's been hit with a load of bricks here. i'm sure he's as shocked as anybody at how this exploded, i'm sure everybody at penn state can because of that cocoon they were living in. i'm not siding with him at all. but i think that this is a classic example of this sequestered new reality world of college football. all of a sudden being bombarded by real life, thankfully in this case, and now mcqueary, whether he's changing his story, whether he remembered new things, but i'm sure that this is his reaction to the unbelievable firestorm that accurately has occurred here over the last ten days or so. >> buzz, you heard the brief exchange that mcqueary had with armen keteyian. also this e-mail obtained by nbc that he's telling teammates that he did intervene, stopped sandusky's alleged rape of a young boy in a locker room shower. what do you make of the inconsistency? >> it's bad. i think it's bad. i am ceaselessly amazed o