I thought it was mainly a liberal trait to try to destroy the lives of successful people.
Having been the target of false accusations by a lying woman myself during the ‘90’s, I am very sensitive to what is going on with both Cain and Paterno.
The claims are unproven and possibly unfounded. Only a TRIAL could reveal the truth (or something close to the truth).
Joe should be given the benefit of the doubt as you say. Where has “innocent until proven guilty” gone?
The man has been convicted only in the “court of public opinion” on the basis of hateful and sanctimonious media reports.
The trustees have shown themselves to be abject cowards. They allowed the MSM to stampede them into canning the most successful coach in America and a MAJOR contributor to University projects.
The fact is that the “gallant” Board has been trying to axe Joe for years: “Too old,” “Out of touch,” etc. The MSM gave them their chance and they lept at it.
I hope Paterno sues them.
Wow. The number of people who have not overreacted - anywhere on the internet, the radio, or on television - is probably less than 10.
I attended Penn State and I have long referred to the Board of Trustees as the “Penn State Politburo.” That is how they act. In this case, I believe as you do that they were merely doing something - ANYTHING - to save face. I believe that in doing so they fired the one man who did anything even approximating the right thing. I mean, here are the facts as we know them:
1) Sandusky wasn’t an employee after 1999. Paterno had no power over him.
2) McQueary witnessed the crime and reported to Paterno. McQueary was not fired. If he had witnessed a murder, would he have gone to Paterno also? I am of the opinion that Paterno never should have been involved. The police can’t start a hearsay investigation simply because the guy reporting the hearsay is famous. That’s not the way they law works.
3) Paterno reported on what he was told to his boss and the de facto police commissioner with jurisdiction. He claims he was not told of the specifics. We will never know what he was told. Still, he took the allegation seriously enough to report it to those two individuals and he put them in touch with the actual witness as well. At this point, having not witnessed anything himself, there is no reason for Paterno to involve himself in any way, including confronting Sandusky. You don’t tip people off that they are the subject of a possible police investigation.
The things I am reading and seeing are absolutely mind-blowing. Yesterday, I heard or read the name “Paterno” hundreds and hundreds of times. What about the monster who was charged with 40 counts of sexual assault? He is solely responsible for those crimes, yet you don’t even see his name. I would bet than 95% of people don’t even know the name of the perpetrator. Yet every idiot with a keyboard and a microphone is saying that “JOE KNEW” and “Joe enabled child rape.”
The fact is the grand jury felt that Paterno met his legal obligation. He said in tears yesterday that with the benefit of hindsight, he wishes he had done more. Yet for being honest he’s crucified even more. Anybody who was a neighbor or coworker to Jeffrey Dahmer could’ve honestly said the same thing. We don’t know what Paterno knew at the time but I believe he deserves the benefit of the doubt. A guy who has given 60 years of his life and his earnings back to the community has earned that. Never a character question in all those years. The program he ran was respected. Yet rather than assuming that Paterno did what the thought was right in 2002, it’s stated that he knew and did nothing - the truth be damned.
This is a sad day and the bloodthirsty mob with their pitchforks and torches will probably never learn. Paterno won’t sue because I don’t think that’s the kind of guy he is, and the amateur Mike Nifongs of the world will continue to bleat.