[BlackElk]

As a matter of fact, Sandusky was NOT his buddy. Apparently Paterno had seen to the university retiring Sandusky and then Sandusky negotiated access to athletic facilities and an office on his own with the Gay-friendly Spanier regime. If you think Paterno was gutless in honoring the university rule book rather than blowing the whistle in public but you don't seem concerned with justice only with getting Paterno's memory.

It hardly ever is enforced nowadays but there is a crime of "misprision of a felony" which might have been applicable here if it could have been proven that any witness knew (not suspected, not had heard or any other mush) that a felony had actually been committed by a known individual. Everyone KNEW Sandusky but, on what evidence there was at the time of the crimes, no one but Sandusky and his victims actually SAW his crimes. McQueary and the janitor are both verrrry flawed witnesses. No one wanted to pursue anyone else which might have brought forth more evidence against who knows whom? But, you know, there are people who agree with the Keith Olberman approach and its simplicity.

[Hoodat]

McQueary and the janitor are both verrrry flawed witnesses.

That is the most pathetic claim I have seen yet. Apparently, their testimony was good enough to get Sandusky indicted, and Paterno fired. Yet you say it was very flawed.

It disgusts me to no end to see people fall to such evil depths to defend the enabling of child rape.