The Grand Jury Report: Part two of "What did Joe Paterno know and when did he know it?"

The Grand Jury Report: Part two of "What did Joe Paterno know and when did he know it?"

Consequently, the evidence available to us thus far not only clears Paterno of any suspicion that he engaged in a cover-up -- an extremely far-fetched suspicion, in the first place -- but also that Paterno earned praise for performing his legal duty. Arguably, by insisting that Schultz be brought in, Paterno went beyond his legal obligation.

Unfortunately, such evidence proved worthless as jackals in the news media seized upon the hysteria surrounding the news of despicable sexual molestation of young boys by Jerry Sandusky to transform a "Jerry Sandusky scandal" into a "Penn State scandal" and then a "Joe Paterno scandal." Now, there's no questioning why the "Jerry Sandusky scandal" emerged. Moreover, given that Sandusky was once employed by Penn State (and maintained close ties with Penn State), and given the grand jury report and the subsequent indictments of Penn State's Athletic Director, Tim Curley, and the Vice President responsible for overseeing the University police, Gary Schultz, one understands how the "Sandusky scandal" became the "Penn State scandal." But, how the "Sandusky scandal" and the "Penn State scandal" became the "Joe Paterno scandal" is much less easy to understand.

The Vicky Triponey Timeline of Terror

Dolores Umbridge from the Harry Potter series?

The Vicky Triponey Timeline of Terror

Interesting words from ESPN

They made a point to destroy Joe Paterno, while they sat on information:

ESPN 11/23: "Criticizing Paterno was fair. For those who claim Paterno didn't have enough information to act, how can you not consider that enough of a red flag? Paterno was morally obligated to do more than just inform former athletic director Tim Curley and senior vice president Gary Schultz, who then oversaw campus police."
(http://espn.go.com/espn/commentary/story/_/page/hill-111122/jemele-hill-readers-respond-support-joe-paterno)

ESPN 11/29: "We kept the tape for 8 years, not really knowing what to do with it. We dont see it as our job to go to authorities with evidence that we collect. Well, for one thing we did not witness anything ourselves."

Upon further review Joe Paterno rose to the occasion while everyone else sunk.

Upon further review Joe Paterno rose to the occasion while everyone else sunk shows that ESPN violated the same standards it applied to Joe Paterno, and that other journalists may have engaged in unprofessional conduct meriting their own dismissal.

Our Web site is now online

http://ps4rs.org/

Facebook Group Update - 410 Members and counting

Our movement is growing each day, this morning we added member 410. If you are interested in joining the movement please submit a request:

WE intend to vote out the Penn State Board of Trustees

Those who join and post offensive information will be banned by the admins.

Joe Paterno's Character (by Robert Young)

Here is a personal story 10 years my nephew who was 12 was dying of cancer and he got a make-wish and his wish was to meet Joe Paterno. I told him there would be no way Joe could come to Pittsburgh Children Hospital to visit him. It was mid Oct and I knew Joe would be way to busy to take time out and visit, but to my surprise not only did Joe make the trip. He brought him a game ball and jersey he spent around two hours with my nephew. It was the best day ever considering how sick he was however, sadly he died three months later and once again Joe shocked us all when not only him, but Sue and Jay came to the funeral. So to make a long story short my heart is broken to what has happened to Joe Paterno and how the media has treated him. Joe Paterno has meant so much to so many people to just be tossed out like garbage. We owe it to Joe to continue to show him our full support he has done nothing wrong God Bless Joe Paterno and please give us the strength to continue to fight the good fight for a man of honor.

Penn State Trustees May Have Violated State Law

Penn State Trustees may have violated Sunshine law with secret/emergency meetings including the one that fired Joe Paterno.

Excellent analysis by an ATTORNEY

Another Side to the Penn State Story

Sandusky Cover Up Scandal

Sandusky Cover Up Scandal at Hacksaw's Sports has an excellent commentary.

Another Trustee: Paterno was Fired to Gratify Media

Trustee: Media frenzy forced board's hand

Why did the trustees rush to judgment? Intense media attention and public outrage compelled them to take immediate action against coach Joe Paterno and President Graham Spanier, according to a trustee who spoke to The Morning Call.

The board feared any delay would only fuel the frenzy outside, said the trustee, who asked to remain anonymous.

The board considered letting Paterno stay on for Saturday's home game, but with interim head coach Tom Bradley assuming the role of team spokesman, the trustee said. In the end, however, he said the board feared all the television cameras would remain focused on Paterno, thereby unnecessarily drawing out the drama and further damaging the university's reputation.

There is is. The Board acted solely to gratify the media, thus underscoring its lack of fitness to exercise stewardship and responsible trust for the University.

"It was a witch hunt at Penn State"

Bill Kline's "It was a witch hunt at Penn State" says all that needs to be said.

In bouncing Paterno last week, John Surma, the vice chair of Penn State's Board of Trustees, said the trustees "do not yet know all the facts."

Exactly 51 seconds later, Surma, when asked why Paterno was let go, responded: "In consideration of all the facts …"

Talk about an oxymoron. Which one is it? Do you have all the facts or not? And if not, on what are you basing your decision?

Trustee Admits Rush to Judgment!

PSU Trustee Speaks About Paterno, Spanier Firings speaks for itself.

He said the board had to act fast last week so the university could move forward, but now it has to take its time making sure it knows all the facts before making other changes.

This is an open admission of a rush to judgment and therefore poor stewardship.

We need a name for our movement

We need a NAME for our group. Our nominees will have a limited amount of space for biographies (hopefully including Penn State activities) and campaign statements. We want them to be able to add a simple phrase to show why they are running against the incumbents:

(1) "Penn State Alumni for Honor"
(2) "Committee to Restore Penn State's Honor"
(3) "Alumni for Responsible Stewardship"
(4) "Committee for Responsible Stewardship"
(5) Others?

E.g. if Franco Harris were to agree to run, he could add simply "Penn State Alumni for Honor Candidate" and people could look up that phrase on the Internet.

Since our goal is indeed to restore our University's honor, we should also do something about the root cause of Sandusky's (alleged until proven) child abuse. I sent a couple of State Reps whom I know a link to a site that lists various states' "Duty to Rescue" laws. These generally provide low-grade misdemeanor penalties for NOT calling the police to intervene in a violent felony, which is what Mike McQueary apparently didn't do (but now claims to have done). This sounds reasonable. (http://volokh.com/2009/11/03/duty-to-rescuereport-statutes/)

Boycott The Meadows Race Track and Casino

Franco Harris fired by Meadows for his support of Joe Paterno

The Meadows Race Track and Casino has fired former Penn State and Steelers great Franco Harris as a spokesman for his support of Joe Paterno.

The Meadows has the right to hire and fire whomever it wants. But this stinks.

Facebook group contact information

I intend to vote out the Penn State Board of Trustees

You must be approved by the group owner.

Trustees' Own Statement Proves Poor Stewardship

Are we the only ones who see something wrong with the fact that the Board fired and humiliated Joe Paterno (and also forced President Spanier to resign, although the buck arguably stops with him) the next day, before the indicated action was taken?

At its regular meeting on Friday, November 11, 2011, the Board will appoint a Special Committee, members of which are currently being identified, to undertake a full and complete investigation of the circumstances that gave rise to the Grand Jury Report. This Special Committee will be commissioned to determine what failures occurred, who is responsible and what measures are necessary to insure that this never happens at our University again and that those responsible are held fully accountable. The Special Committee will have whatever resources are necessary to thoroughly fulfill its charge, including independent counsel and investigative teams, and there will be no restrictions placed on its scope or activities. Upon the completion of this investigation, a complete report will be presented at a future public session of the Board of Trustees.

"Sentence first, verdict afterward" is suitable for a scene in Alice in Wonderland but not for responsible adults who are entrusted with the welfare of an institution like Penn State.

Note that there was obviously no determination whatsoever of what failures occurred or who was responsible before the Board (in our opinion) caved in to media pressure the following day. This should make an excellent management and business ethics case study, and we encourage management schools to adopt it as such. We may even cite it in our new book on management and leadership, which stresses the role of a leader as a steward and holder in trust (the Indo-European root dher, e.g. Dharma, Jemadar) of an organization's well-being.

Procedure for Petition Candidates

Membership Selection

Alumni trustees are elected, three each year for three-year terms, by the following procedure: On or before January 15 each year, nominating ballots are sent (1) to all alumni of the University who have, within two years prior to March 1 of each year, been either active members of the Penn State Alumni Association or contributors to the Penn State Fund, or (2) to any other alumni who make a request in writing for a ballot.

Qualified alumni who receive 50 or more nominating votes, and who accept the nomination in writing, have their names placed on an election ballot which is sent to the alumni (specified in the paragraph above) on or before April 10. At a time specified by the Board during spring commencement week, the ballots are tabulated in the presence of two trustee tellers. The three candidates receiving the highest number of votes are declared elected.

Nomination forms must be submitted to the Office of the Board of Trustees by the deadline specified.

THE DEADLINE IS MARCH 1 2011

Contact Information: The Pennsylvania State University Board of Trustees 205 Old Main University Park, PA 16802-1571 Office: (814) 865-2521 Fax: (814) 863-4631 Email: bot "at" psu.edu

Penn State Trustees' Questionable Stewardship

The Chinese leadership concept of the Mandate of Heaven relates to the leader's or monarch's service to his or her stakeholders, and stewardship for the welfare of the organization. The Indo-European root dher, which appears in Asian Indian titles like Sirdar, Jemadar, and so on along with names like Darius means "to hold" in the sense of responsibility or stewardship. From where we sit, the manner in which Penn State's Trustees fired football coach Joe Paterno illustrates poor stewardship.

One statement in favor of Paterno's dismissal said the Trustees had to "stop the bleeding" over the scandal due to former coach Jerry Sandusky's alleged sexual abuse of children. One can indeed stop a head wound from bleeding by cutting the patient's throat, which may well be what the Trustees did to the University in terms of future alumni support. (The thousands of students who demonstrated against Paterno's dismissal will be alumni in a few years.) Everything about the affair, including an emergency meeting, suggests not a careful and deliberative process but rather a hasty rush to judgment. The elephant in the living room is the conspicuous absence of assistant coach Mike McQueary from the list of those fired or forced to resign. Trustee spokesman John Surma said Wednesday that there "has been no change in (McQueary's) status at this time."

From where we sit, the Trustees' unspoken objective, and the word "groupthink" comes to mind, was to satiate a media feeding frenzy. We cannot identify any "careful consideration" (the words used in conjunction with Paterno's dismissal) in terms of deliberation much less impartial investigation. The committee or panel the Trustees said would investigate has in fact yet to be created. The phrase "Sentence first, verdict afterward" from Alice in Wonderland comes to mind immediately.

Let's look at the media lynch mob's view that "Paterno should have done more to protect the children" from a position of common sense and reality rather than emotion or a self-serving desire to attack the country's most respected football coach and mentor. Kenny Rogers' lyrics "Did you ever kick a good man when he was down, just to make yourself feel strong?" come to mind immediately in the latter context. The same goes for a beer-muscle crowd that always knows with the benefit of 20:20 hindsight what the person on the spot should have done. Suppose that Paterno had indeed called the State Police as soon as McQueary brought his allegations to him.

State Trooper: "All right, Mr. Paterno, what did you see, and when and where did you see it?"

Paterno: "I wasn't there."

Trooper (not very impressed): "Then the man who was there needs to talk to us."

The best Paterno could have therefore done even with the benefit of 20:20 hindsight (the indictment against Jerry Sandusky) would have been to put McQueary in touch with the police instead of University administrators. Then it would have been McQueary's word against Sandusky's unless the victim could be located. We cannot give legal advice but we are not even sure it is possible to prosecute a sex crime without a victim.

It is very bad judgment to accuse anybody of a crime you cannot prove, and this was (in 2002) an easily foreseeable outcome of Paterno "taking the matter further than he did." The scenario is not hypothetical, and we speak from personal experience.

A few years ago, while researching Barack Obama's legislative tolerance for live birth abortion, we found on a very prominent pro-life Web site a credible accusation that a named doctor and hospital had left an unwanted baby (as defined by law, not the pro-life camp) to die from neglect. We took reasonable, prudent, and limited action by forwarding the hearsay evidence (the same kind of evidence in front of Paterno) to the hospital regulatory agency of the state in question. In other words, we went through channels as Paterno went through channels. The agency discovered the accusation to be false, so the Web site owner was lucky to not be sued for libel along with the source of the accusation. This illustrates the possible consequences of "doing more" as Paterno's critics say he should have done.

The context in which McQueary reported his allegations to Paterno could have easily reinforced the nightmare scenario of a false accusation to the wrong people followed by its moral and legal consequences. Our immediate first reaction would have been, "You weren't confident enough that you saw what you think you saw to call the police on the spot. How can I be confident enough to call them on the basis of hearsay evidence now?" This does not mean we would have looked the other way or done nothing; we did something about the hearsay report of a baby's purported murder. Paterno also did something. He took the allegation to his superiors, and probably assumed quite reasonably that they would involve the University's attorney to handle the matter in a way that would not expose the University to a libel suit. That is good stewardship, which makes the Trustees' preemptory dismissal and humiliation of the man who exercised it bad stewardship.

Paterno had no way to know that Gary Schultz, whose supervisory responsibilities included the campus police, would not handle the matter thoroughly and would later be indicted for perjury. Graham Spanier's sole fault meanwhile seems to be that, as Schultz's supervisor, the buck technically stopped with him.

The underlying problem is of course that McQueary did not call the police to report an (alleged until proven) violent felony in progress. Had he done so, the police might have arrived in time to catch Sandusky in the act, or at least in time to catch him when he tried to leave with the boy. Then they would have had a victim, witnesses including not only McQueary but also the responding officer(s), physical evidence, and an open and shut case.

It is therefore impossible for us to envision any circumstances in which the Trustees can be right about firing Paterno while not firing McQueary. Had the Trustees fired everybody involved including McQueary, we would not agree with the action's haste or its fairness to Paterno, but nobody could say that the Trustees had not been consistent. They could also have fired nobody while waiting for both the law and their own investigative panel to do their work. They instead chose the worst possible course of action; one whose inconsistency makes it impossible for us to accept their boilerplate statement that it was for the best interests of the University. We perceive only a hasty consensus to satiate a media lynch mob by firing and humiliating a man known not only for his football victories but also for making star players go to class rather than win games for him if that choice had to be made. Others also perceive it this way, and that is not in the best interests of the University.

--Bill Levinson B.S. '78