.

Election 2012: Kane Will Be First Woman, First Democrat Elected to Hold PA Attorney General Post

Pennsylvania voters elect their first woman and first Democrat to be the state's attorney general.

Kathleen Kane achieved two firsts in her Pennsylvania attorney general election victory:

  • First woman to be elected attorney general
  • First Democrat to win the top prosecutor's post

She defeated Republican David Freed 56 to 41 percent in unofficial results from Tuesday's voting.

Kane won the support of Lehigh Valley voters on her way to statewide success:

Lehigh County

  • Kane: 74,854
  • Freed: 55,440

Northampton County

  • Kane: 66,772
  • Freed: 52,675

Kane, 46, is a former Lackawanna County prosecutor who will now oversee an office with a staff of about 700 and subject to legislative battles over a budget that now stands at $81 million, according to a Philly.com report.

Kane had a slight fundraising edge in the race. 

Both candidates pledged a review of the Jerry Sandusky child rape case and its handling by former Attorney General Tom Corbett, now the state's governor.

sieben13 November 07, 2012 at 09:17 PM
I hope the first thing she does is investigate the involvement tom corbett had in the penn state scandal
NE12Ukid November 07, 2012 at 11:56 PM
Yes! "Both candidates pledged a review of the Jerry Sandusky child rape case and its handling by former Attorney General Tom Corbett, now the state's governor."
Roger November 08, 2012 at 02:17 AM
I hope she does not open the Sandusky case, or anything related to it. The scandal has dragged on long enough. How about addressing current matters? Why not devote effort to that which is in front of PA citizens? Far too much time has been given to some of the matters of long ago, at the expense of keeping the current workload front-center. While many talk about unity, about non-partisanship, and working together, others use any opportunity to continue to drag up old stuff that is primarily driven by revenge.
Janis OD November 08, 2012 at 02:38 AM
"Dragging up old stuff for revenge" may be your opinion of the motivation, but my interest is seeing that all players in the tragedy are held responsible and accountable for their actions. This is a criminal case and the motivations of those who knew of the scandalous abuse I cannot imagine.
Roger November 08, 2012 at 02:49 AM
Yea, yea, yea, ... we always hear the "justice is done" reasoning. Reality is often far different. The vendetta mantra is rampant in state politics. Continuing to pursue all those people surrounding the Sandusky case is a time and money pit. Why has this case continued to see so much coverage and have so much interest? The answer is pretty simple: We (including myself) like to see the demise of others so that we can show ourselves and others how we are better. Not to minimize the actions of Sandusky, or dismiss them, we are all of the same stripe of wrongdoing. Just because my wrongdoing, and yours, isn't public and so obvious, we are guilty nevertheless. Not one of us meet the standard of perfection.
sieben13 November 08, 2012 at 11:02 AM
The Penn State scandal is unfinished business and should find closure, Sandusky got 30-60 years ,there are those that should be his cell mate.
JS November 08, 2012 at 12:49 PM
Roger - not sure what type of nonpublic wrongdoing is in your closet, but personally, anything wrong I've done in my life doesn't begin to approach the abuse of children which will scar them for life. It's popular to say enough is enough in big public cases like this, but it always seems to get said right before the involvement of the highest level of those involved starts to come in question. Sandusky was allowed to continue to work with children for years after it was well known what he had done. For the attorney general at the time (Corbett) to allow him to continue his heinous actions while he plodded along in his investigation needs to be looked at. How many kids were molested while Corbett played politics with the republican guard at Penn State? Sorry if you're bored by the whole thing, I'd like the investigation to be completed, no matter what office the offenders hold.
James November 08, 2012 at 06:37 PM
Can we get a poll into this article? Who thinks Roger is a PSU grad????
Roger November 08, 2012 at 11:55 PM
Quoting: " ... but personally, anything wrong I've done in my life doesn't begin to approach the abuse of children which will scar them for life. ..." Thank you for proving my point. Your statement is exactly the kind of thinking that makes my assertion correct, "... yea, I may be bad, but not as bad as him .... now I feel better about myself." The penalty for wrongdoing is uncoupled from public, and nonpublic. What does the nature of the wrongdoing have to do with the matter? Wrong is wrong. Who do we delude if we think the wrongs we do in private are OK? I see you have not refuted my assertion about why we enjoy seeing the demise of others. What will define "finished" for you?
Roger November 08, 2012 at 11:56 PM
Just as JS, you have no refutation of my assertion. What does "PSU" grad have to do with anything?
seen2mch November 09, 2012 at 01:09 AM
How about we find out why the top law enforcement official in the state(Attorney Gen. Corbett) failed to bring charges against Sandusky when he had a chance to,at the very least, charge and expose Sandusky and eliminate any more opportunities for him to abuse children. Instead,he remained associated with Sandusky`s First Mile Charity and then when the scandal blew up rushed and bullied the Board of Trustees into throwing others under the bus. Corbett is implicit in this scandal....keep watching!
Mark A. November 09, 2012 at 01:29 AM
I dont understand why you would be against an investigation of the guy who didnt properly investigate Sandusky at the time. Surely if he is found to have been complicit then that would serve as an example against people who might be tempted to make the same choices in the future?
JS November 09, 2012 at 11:38 AM
Roger - you certainly read a lot into my statement about any wrongdoing I've done in my life, and you completely miss the point. Your original point about none of us being perfect DOES minimize Sandusky's actions, even though you want to think it doesn't. To rephrase your original logic - Why did we give so much attention to Timothy McVeigh for the Oklahoma bombing. We just like to see the demise of others, right, to make ourselves feel better about ourselves. We've all done things that are wrong, none of us are perfect, we're all the same when it comes to wrongdoing. Why investigate McVeigh any further to see if others are involved, it just takes time and money. Oh, and I'm not trying to minimize the actions of McVeigh.
JS November 09, 2012 at 11:38 AM
See how ridiculous that argument sounds in the case of a horrible crime? Seeing the demise of some arrogant public figure trying to tell us all how to live our lives, then getting caught in a sordid sex scandal - yes it does make us feel good to see the demise of someone in that case, I'll admit to that. But to apply your theory of shadenfreude to horrible cases of child molestation, murder and other violent crimes is just over simplification. You equating a joint I may have smoked in my house or buying something I think may have been stolen or cheating on my wife to child molestation is pretty ridiculous. Sorry, you missed my intent, I didn't prove your point because I don't buy your point. Being bored with an issue is not a reason to stop looking for those complicent in a crime. I know the American public has a short attention span, but why are some always ready to move on just when the investigation gets to someone in power?
JS November 09, 2012 at 12:00 PM
Finished in this case is defined by thoughoughly looking into who knew what was going on with Sandusky and finding out if their actions or lack of actions contributed to more crimes being committed. They've gone through the entire athletic dept. and leadership of Penn St., as they should have. Time to look outside the state-run school and see if anyone else looked the other way when further horrible crimes could have been prevented, especially by those entrusted to prosecute and prevent the continuation of a criminal activity. Finished, to me, is not when the news cycle is done and we need to direct our limited attention to something else, or we've already spent enough money and time. Finished is when we know that everyone who committed a crime or allowed a crime to happen has been punished. Kids were hurt and scarred for life, I think it's the least we can do.
Roger November 10, 2012 at 01:44 AM
JS, clearly you are not understanding my point. I will put it succinctly: Wrongdoing is not graded on a curve. Timothy McVeigh has zero to do with this case. Bringing in something like this is to obfuscate the matter. The Sandusky case had all the things that made it work for huge public consumption: sex, abuse of boys, high-profile athletic department and brand name coach, divisive perception of the college. With the many, many cases of sexual abuse of children, the media had a high-yielding field. It was the media dream case, and promoted as such. No other case received this kind of coverage. I contend, and nobody chooses to refute the argument, that the news consumers sucked up all the nectar of the stories. Of all the news stories, this one sopped up much of the oxygen in the room. People like to follow stories in which the villain is a scumbag in their view. Again, why? Because it makes them feel so much better about themselves. Your comment proved my point, "... I've done bad, but nothing like Sandusky....," as if your wrong-doing was better. Ha, ha, ... Kidding yourself, huh? Relativism has seeped into the thinking on many fronts, and this is one of them. What sets your moral compass that says, "I am OK because I don't sexually abuse boys like Sandusky?" The reason people want more investigation is keep Sandusky's name in the news. I'm sorry, but your idea of "finished" lacks definition. There will always be one more rock to overturn.
NE12Ukid November 10, 2012 at 04:09 AM
"my interest is seeing that all players in the tragedy are held responsible and accountable " I agree, Janis. Would they have been satisfied that the hijackers of 9-11 all died and that a lot of the key players were captured/killed, and say let's just let Osama binLaden go, and let's just "address current matters"? Same thing here, if there are still guilty parties out there, they ALL should be brought to justice.
NE12Ukid November 10, 2012 at 04:43 AM
Yes! This is what we have been discussing. "Both candidates pledged a review of the Jerry Sandusky child rape case and its handling by former Attorney General Tom Corbett, now the state's governor."
JS November 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM
Roger - your point has been pretty consistent. You want the investigation to end for two reasons: One - We all do wrong and people just want to continue this to make themselves feel better about our own crimes and misdemeanors. I still find this argument attempts to trivialize the serious damage that was done to children in this case by comparing it to minor trangressions that we all have in our closet. Two - The media has oversaturated us with this story because of the people involved, the college it occured at and the type of crime committed. Therefore we should just put this to bed because it could be neverending and too expensive. I don't refute the oversaturation of this story, I just reject it as a reason to stop investigating those that may have allowed the crimes to go on and create more victims of this monster. I understand your points, I just reject them. Good luck against Nebraska today.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »