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 purpose of this blog is to promote action to restore the good name and reputation of the Pennsylvania State University, by exposing the leadership failures of its Board of Trustees along with evidence of problems with the Freeh Report and the NCAA. This blog advocates intervention by the Pennsylvania Legislature, Attorney General, and other outside entities to achieve this.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
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?"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Great points.
ReplyDelete