I would thereby guestimate then at least 1/3rd of Penn Staters informally sanction the idea that Joe's cover-up was a "good idea."
I think that’s a bit of a stretch and before you go off on me, here is why.
First of all let me say I’m not in any way supporting Paterno, who I once held in high regard but no more, and I think the BOT did the right thing and should have done it long before the proverbial crap hit the fan. And sure, there are some folks here in PA including I’m sure some PSU students who idolize JoePa and PSU football and think him incapable of any wrong doing (heck, there are a few here as well).
However I saw a few PSU students interviewed recently on local TV. Among some of those who felt the BOT was wrong, they clarified in saying that while it wasn’t necessarily wrong for the BOT to fire Paterno, at least some were upset with how it was handled. They felt that the BOT should have notified Paterno in person of the firing and before making it public and not doing it late at night as they did. Some thought that more needed to be known about Paterno’s involvement in any cover up before summarily firing him in the middle of the night. I'm not sure I agree but I understand their point.
If the poll was worded differently, say instead of “Did the Board of Trustees do the right thing by firing Paterno” and instead asked “If Paterno is found to have covered up for Sandusky…” I think the poll results might be very different. Polls are funny that way and wording is everything and that is why I take them, especially informal internet polls with a big grain of salt.
Again, I think what happened was vile, disgusting, deplorable and inexcusable. A lot of people seem to have known about Sandusky and did very little about it. And all of those people need to be held accountable, JoePa included. Even if some of the PSU officials did what was “legally” required, and I have some doubts that they did do all that was legally required, certainly many did not do what was ethically and morally required.
But I do not want to jump on the lynch mob band wagon either. I think of the Duke Lacrosse Case. There were innocent people smeared in that case in the court of public and media opinion before all the facts were known.
I read the grand jury report and it’s sickening. However there have been some posts on FR calling for Sandusky’s wife to be hauled off to jail because some surmise that she must have known or must have been involved herself. Some have proposed the whole university be shut down as they are; the faculty and student body (or at least a large number of them) all perverts. I think that’s hyperbole.
I hope that now that the GJ report is out and charges have been filed, that there is justice for the truly innocent victims and that Sandusky and anyone who covered for him get all they deserve. But that will be decided in a court of law.
It should also be mentioned that several thousand PSU students last night held a candle light vigil for the victims in this case and for all victims of child abuse.
I seriously doubt that 35% of the PSU students or residents of PA sanction pedophilia and child abuse and any cover up of such crimes.
(a) Those who are repentant of the "culture of cover up" that the Attorney General's statement mentions -- even if they had no direct tie to any overt cover up...
(b) And those who don't think Paterno should have been fired at all...no matter how and when he was told. These, I would say, continue to be part of the "cultural" problem of lack of accountability.
Btw, every major Old Testament prophet engaged in identificational repentance...asking God for forgiveness of sins that Israel committed -- but that they themselves personally were not guilty for...they identified with the sins of their people and pleaded with God to turn His people around.
[I agree with what you said re: the common objection in State College...Paterno being told by the BOT 10:00 at night over the phone]
So the "bottom line" is that you can't tell me there are not a sizeable # in that (b) category.
It should also be mentioned that several thousand PSU students last night held a candle light vigil for the victims in this case and for all victims of child abuse.
I have a Q re: this: I have seen in the Central PA media and one place elsewhere comments from Penn State students who said that their entire student body should not be judged by what perhaps 2-3% of their student population engaged in Wednesday night re: the riot.
IOW don't judge the 100% by the 2-3% Right?
The Media says that "several thousand" students & alumni were @ this vigil Friday night. Considering that a # of these were alumni (+ other members of the community), if we say that up to 2,000 were actual students, then that's 5% of the student body (40,000).
Now tell me: If 5% of the student body was at the vigil, why are you asking us to judge the 100% by the 5%? Especially in light of Penn State students telling us NOT to judge the 100% by the 3%?
Please convince me as to why we should consider the vigil "more representative" of the Penn State student body than the riot on Wednesday night?
I think she at least needs to be investigated...considering the alleged call she made to one of the victim's prior to his GJ testimony.