[outpostinmass2]

As I said before Paterno could have done a lot more and so could have the other people. One thing that the report showed over and over again that neither Paterno nor anyone else connected with the 2001 incident ever inquired into the well being of the child. Paterno took actions long after reporting the incident to his superiors as the emails and hand written notes show. Paterno even talked Spanier and Shultz out of reporting Sandusky to the authorities. In fact the Clery Act states what Paterno should have done. Paterno thought that Penn State had a better system and didn't need to adhere to the Clery Act system.

I want to find out about Gricar as well. Harmon, Schultz, Curley and Spanier will have their day in court too. It appears from the report that they reported more to Paterno or at least certainly had no control over him.

As for Paterno, the Freeh report spells out his lack of action. I guess you are right. Paterno didn't do anything.

[Uncle Chip]

Paterno even talked Spanier and Shultz out of reporting Sandusky to the authorities.

Where is the evidence for that?? Freeh never interviewed Spanier or Schultz, and he tortured one email to death to get it to change its meaning.

In fact the Clery Act states what Paterno should have done.

That chapter reads: The University's failure to implement the Clery Act -- not Paterno's failure. It wasn't his job to implement it.

As for Paterno, the Freeh report spells out his lack of action.

So which is it -- his action or lack of action. Was he busy running interference or was he not involved. Freeh needs to make up his mind.

As I scan through Freeh's timeline of significant events I see Curley, Spanier, Schultz, Harmon but little or no Paterno. Is he saying that Paterno was in the middle of this or should have insisted on being in the middle of this??? Freeh can't make up his mind. I think he's mad that he couldn't find more Paterno involvement than he did.

And since Spanier, Schultz, Harmon, and Curley knew of the 1998 incident and Paterno didn't, why would they even consult him about going to the authorities. It should have been a slam dunk for them -- unless there is something more going on here as with the DA in that county at the time.

Where in the report does he discuss Ray Gricar??? And if it is not in there don't you find that odd??? If Gricar had just indicted Sandusky back in 1998, he would have been outed and none of this happened. He would never have gotten to the second mile.