Two major events have occurred since the firing of Joe Paterno which prove that the news media are not only incompetent and dishonest but also hypocritical beyond anything anyone would have thought possible.
And both revelations are about as damning as could be imagined both against ESPN, whose commentators condemnation of Paterno and demands for his firing were some of the loudest, and the school officials at Central Mountain high school, where Sandusky's Victim One went to school.
The first revelation concerns the molestation charges against Syracuse assistant coach Bernie Fine. One of Fine's accusers secretly tape-recorded a phone conversation he had with Fine's wife in 2002 in which the sexual contact with Fine was discussed and where Fine's wife admitted she knew everything her husband had been doing. Fine's accuser says he took the tape to the Syracuse Post Standard in 2002 along with his allegations against Fine and played the audiotape for them. The newspaper declined to report the allegations saying that, even with the tape they wanted more corroborating evidence before they would report it. In other words the Syracuse Post Standard gave more of the benefit of the doubt to an accused child molester than the news media in general gave to Joe Paterno, a man with a polished solid gold reputation for 60 years. And there has been no outcry by any of the sanctimonious self-serving members of the media who railed against Joe Paterno focused on the Post Standard for "having knowledge of" sexual abuse and not reporting it.
It gets a lot worse. It has also been revealed that the victim took the same audiotape to ESPN more than ten years ago with his allegations against Fine and played the tape for them, No one at ESPN did a thing. For ten years. They didn't talk to their own lawyers.They didn't refer it to any child protective agency. They didn't refer it to any law enforcement agency. They did nothing. And now try and hide behind the excuse that they didn't have enough corroborating evidence to do any more.
This is the same ESPN whose commentators called for Joe Paterno's firing immediately for, in their factually challenged hypocritical world, "not going to the authorities" or "not doing enough", The same ESPN whose commentators said Joe Paterno going to the administrative head of campus police the next day with McQueary's non-specific report wasn't enough. The same ESPN who accused Joe Paterno without a shred of proof, of being aware of child sexual abuse and "not doing enough". The same ESPN that had an audio tape confirming from the mouth of the abuser's own wife, the sexual abuse of a ball boy at Syracuse university. And did nothing.
And are the same sanctimonious self-righteous group of journalists insisting that anyone at ESPN who had been aware of those tapes for the last ten years and who is still with ESPN be fired? No, of course not.
We now know that the same media types both on television and in print who smeared Joe Paterno on their front pages with the word "Shame", without a shred of proof, did absolutely nothing when put in Paterno's shoes.
Unfortunately the second set of revelations makes it even worse for the media
New revelations were made by the mother of Sandsusky's Victim One that will forever shame even further everyone in the news media who attacked Paterno as well as the trustees of Penn State who buckled under the pressure exerted by the media mob and threw Paterno over the side to quiet them down.
Keep in mind that the fictional narrative by the press in their attack on Paterno, their reason for demanding he be fired was that he had knowledge of sexual abuse and didn't do enough when it came to reporting it, ( something that has already been proved to be completely false).
According to the mother, in a piece that can be read here, the principal of the high school her son attended, Karen Probst, was present in 2009 when her son openly accused Sandusky of molesting him and not only did the school principal do nothing, according to the mother the principal actually tried to talk her and her son out of reporting it.
Additionally, according to the mother, Steve Turchetta, the boy's high school coach repeatedly allowed Sandusky to come to the school and take the boy out of school not only without parental consent but without even any parental notification. And Turchetta continued to allow Sandusky to take the boy out of school even after the mother found out and protested.
The mother states that eventually there was a meeting at the school after the boy had told all to a school counselor and had gotten so emotional they finally believed him. At that meeting the mother states that when she insisted they go to the police, the school officials tried to talk her out of it. They told her to think about it and think about what the accusations could do to her family.
All of this information was available at any time any real journalist wanted to take the time to actually investigate and learn the facts. But all of them, like Sean Gregory at Time Magazine, Andy Staples at Sports Illustrated and just about everyone at ESPN except Lou Holtz, were too busy smearing Paterno to bother. It was Paterno they went after. Because it was Joe Paterno's picture that sold newspapers and got web hits, not Karen Probst's.It was going after Paterno that made the very small and sanctimonious feel very big.
The irony is, that in the end, Joe Paterno did more and with less knowledge, and did it faster than anyone connected to either the Sandusky allegations or the Bernie Fine allegations, all of whom had more knowledge that he did.
And isn't it ironic ( or perhaps par for the course) that ESPN, whose commentators like Jay Bilas and others were some of the most vocal for saying Paterno didn't do enough, had an audio tape that contained an admission of the sexual abuse of a Syracuse ball boy for ten years and did nothing.
So what will ESPN do now? Will they accuse themselves of "not doing enough"? Will they accuse themselves of allowing a sexual predator to remain free? Will there be any media condemnation by others of ESPN?Anyone hear any media condemnation? Anyone demanding people at ESPN be fired? Or will they all hide under their sheets?
So now class lets review the facts: Joe Paterno the day after getting a non-specific non detailed sanitized version of events from McQueary went to the administrative head of the Penn State campus police with Mc Queary's allegations against a man he knew and worked with closely for 26 years, without hesitating or calling Sandusky to get his side of the story. Karen Probst, Victim One's high school principal, Steve Turchetta his high school coach, the school's assistant principal, the school guidance counselor, Ray Gricar, the DA at the time who declined to prosecute, the Syracuse Post-Standard, and ESPN all had specific allegations and in the case of the Fine, a tape recorded admission of child sexual abuse and did absolutely nothing for years. These are some of the people who yelled the loudest about Joe Paterno and moral responsibility. These are some of the people who demanded Joe Paterno be fired for not doing more.
People are angry about what happened to Paterno. They should be even angrier now and should demand not only the restoration of Paterno's reputation, they should demand retribution.
Journalists who falsely accused Paterno should be fired and so should anyone who had knowledge of the events surrounding Sandusky and Bernie Fine. That includes journalists and school officials.
There should be demands that Sean Gregory at Time Magazine who wrote that Joe Paterno "knew a ten year old boy was being raped in a shower and didn't report it to authorities" with no evidence to substantiate it be fired. So should his editor for allowing Gregory's dishonest report to be printed. So should an ESPN columnist named Jemele Hill who wrote her own dishonest column about Paterno simply parroting the false reporting of other journalists and making the same false claims. Anyone at ESPN with knowledge of the Bernie Fine tape should be suspended or fired. The two senators in Pennsylvania, Democrat Bob Casey and Republican Pat Toomey should be eviscerated, their offices deluged with phone calls for withdrawing their sponsorship of Paterno for the Medal of Freedom without any facts, just acting like spineless politicians reacting to the mob . And last but not least every trustee at Penn State who voted to fire Joe Paterno, which is all of them, should resign. They are the people who disgraced Penn State, not Joe Paterno.
The Penn State trustees made a mockery of every value that a university tries to instill in its students and proved, ironically that the trustees can't be trusted. They should all in good conscience, resign. If not their resignations should be demanded since it was they, not Joe Paterno who betrayed the values of Penn State,denying Paterno any form of due process and capitulating to a dishonest incompetent, out of control mob of journalists.
The day after Paterno was fired, students at Penn State demonstrated and demonstrated angrily. They knew, as college students tend to know, that a gross injustice had been done to Joe Paterno and they were motivated by something that the Penn State trustees and those in the news media either lost a long time ago or never had in the first place -- ideals.
The students at Penn State saw that the ideals preached at Penn State were trampled on by a mob of out of control self-serving journalists and a spineless collection of trustees. And they were justifiably angry. They knew a gross injustice had been done. The factually challenged Stuart Scott, reporting on the demonstrations for ESPN said of the demonstrators, "Don't they get it"? Here is a flash to Stuart Scott and the rest of the news media. They got it. You didn't.
When Paterno was given the sanitized version of the event in the shower by McQueary he went straight to the administrative head of campus police, the police agency that had the jurisdiction over any crime committed on the campus of Penn State. Joe Paterno went to the proper authority, he went immediately and he went as high as he could go. The news media, the Penn State trustees, the politicians, ESPN and everyone else who attacked Joe Paterno, given the opportunity, went as low as they could go. They will be remembered for it. And they should all lose their jobs. But before they go, they owe Joe Paterno one big apology.
The media repeated the lie over and over again and still are either knowing full well they didn't have any evidence to back it up but did it for their own self-serving reasons or are simply too stupid to know there is no evidence to back it up.
The lie, as everyone knows, is that Joe Paterno knew a 10 year old boy was raped by Jerry Sandsusky in the showers at Penn State and didn't report it to the proper authorities.
That lie was repeated over and over again by a torch carrying mob of ignorant journalists until the trustees finally fired Paterno under pressure by the mob in the press who continue to this day, to repeat the lie as if it were fact. And no doubt feel smug about it,
But the more information that comes out, the more we see just how ignorant and malicious the press was while at the same time, the press ignores the information that exposes them for what they have been.
No one in the news media knows exactly what Paterno was told and knew except that Paterno himself and McQueary both stated that Paterno was told a watered down sanitized non specific non detailed version of what happened in that shower. But everyone in the news media collectively ignored that since "not knowing" doesn't make a good story, and doesn't, as Karl Ravech at ESPN said, "advance the story". There was even something as preposterous as Jay Bilas, an ESPN basketball analyst saying, " a 60 year old man was in a shower with a ten year old boy. That's all you have to know". Really? Grandfathers and fathers who have had children late in life, beware if Jay Bilas comes to your town.
The witch hunting has gotten so out of control that Franco Harris, one of the few to stand up and defend Paterno was himself fired as a spokesman for the Meadows race track and casino, specifically because of his defense of Paterno. This what happens with fascists when someone dares to speak out about something in opposition to the party line.
But another fact has emerged which makes the journalistic mob look even worse than before, a fact that has been conveniently glossed over by the news media for the obvious self-serving reasons.
In response to news reports of McQueary's claim that he did go to the police, the local police chief pointed out that while they have no record of McQuery filing a report with them, McQueary wouldn't have gone to them in the first place for the simple reason that, as the police chief pointed out in his statement, the local police have no jurisdiction over a crime that occurs on the Penn State campus. That,as the police chief pointed out, is the sole jurisdiction of the Penn State Campus Police.
The significance of this is crucial because if the only police agency with jurisdiction over what McQueary witnessed was the Penn State Campus police then Paterno did in fact do everything the moralizers said he didn't do. Gary Shultz was one of the Penn State administrators Paterno went to with whatever McQueary told him. Gary Shultz was the supervisor and overseer of the Penn State Campus Police.When it comes to reporting anything to the Penn State Campus Police, you couldn't get any higher than Shultz.He was, in effect, the chief of Penn State campus police.
Based on this fact and this reality, Paterno did exactly what all the self serving moralizers said he should have done and in fact, there was NO police agency other than the Penn State campus police who had jurisdiction and no other police agency Paterno should have gone to.
This is what happens when ignorant people convinced of all their own self-righteous beliefs but ignorant of facts band together in a mindless mob and go on a rampage.This is what the news media were and continue to be regarding Joe Paterno.
Members of the media like Sean Gregory of Time Magazine and Andy Staples of Sports Illustrated and any number of commentators at ESPN, the Daily News, and other media outlets, all wrote or commented that Paterno knew a 10 year old boy was raped in the showers and only reported it to Curley and Shultz and so shirked his responsibilities when we now know that reporting it to the campus police was fulfilling ALL of Paterno's legal and moral responsibilities. Maybe these ignorant journalists don't think the Penn State campus police are real police. Maybe they'd like to say that to the faces of the Penn State campus police who were in full riot gear the night of the protests, and had tear gas and firearms at their disposal if needed. Penn State has 80,000 students stretched over campuses state wide with the biggest population at the Happy Valley campus. It is a small city. The Penn State campus police are as real and have as much authority as any police anywhere in any jurisdiction. So now the lie that Paterno didnt do enough by only going to the head of campus police can be put to rest.
But as everyone knows, the biggest lie that Sean Gregory and others tell is that Paterno knew a 10 year old boy was being raped in spite of the fact that Paterno himself said he was never told that by McQueary.
Based on all the known facts, Joe Paterno could sue for libel for that reporting. And he should. The case is so open and shut it would never get to court. The media outlets Paterno could sue wouldn't let it. Instead there would be out of court settlements for millions with the stipulation that Paterno never talk about it. Why? Because the news media wants to preserve their -uh - reputations.
Of course there are those in the media, and small minority outside the media that believe that Paterno just had to know the specifics of what on. They have no proof but they say it anyway. So what did McQueary actually tell Paterno? We don't know.And neither does one single journalist anywhere. But here is something we do know.
Just a few days ago, the Citadel, a military college in South Carolina revealed they had something of a child abuse scandal of their own. In reporting the story a CNN reporter wrote:
"In 2007, the college received an allegation that five years earlier, ReVille invited two campers at The Citadel Summer Camp into his room to watch pornography. They did not touch each other, but engaged in sexual activity."
Kind of missing in specifics isn't it. The reporter doesn't say what sexual activity or how they engaged in sexual activity without touching each other. Was it an out of body experience? Acrobatics? Mind over matter?
Most people are smart enough to figure out for themselves that what this journalist so awkwardly and cryptically is trying to say is, in all probability they engaged in some kind of group masturbation. The reporter could have said so in so many words. He could have been specific. They didn't.
So an experienced reporter writing for CNN could not make a simple declarative statement about the specifics of a sexual event that took place, even with time to reflect and to get the words right and even with the help from an alleged editor,and over an event with which they had no personal involvement. Yet we are supposed to believe McQuery gave 84 year old football coach Joe Paterno specifics when an experienced reporter with all the time in the world to reflect, couldn't.The irony is, that even if McQueary did tell Paterno all the specifics ( something Paterno and McQueary deny) Paterno did everything he could have and should have done in reporting it. There is no other police agency Paterno could have or should have gone other than the head of Penn State campus police, Gary Shultz. And he and McQueary did. What Shultz did or did not do at that point is none of Paterno's responsibility. Period.
It is not in Joe Paterno's DNA to sue. He has always avoided the limelight and personal publicity and he doesn't need the money. But there are many reasons of principle Paterno should sue certain journalists and media outlets for libel and defamation, not the least of which is that its a law suit Paterno could not lose and would mete out well deserved justice to the news media. After all isn't justice what the news media has been clamoring about?
The legal definition of libel, which in many cases is hard to prove especially in cases involving celebrities or public figures, fits what happened to Paterno like a glove.
Two important elements must be proved. One, that the person making the libelous statements knew the statements were not true ,and two, that the person making the libelous statements knew they would injure and harm the person they were making the statements about. Two elements that in Paterno's case could be proved so easily the media outlets being sued would settle almost immediately. And as part of the settlement Paterno could demand a public apology.
One target would be Sean Gregory and Time Magazine. Gregory in print and in so many words stated that "Paterno knew a 10 year old boy was raped in the showers at Penn State and didn't report it to the authorities". No number of lawyers at Time could defend the double fabrication by Sean Gregory.
Similar statements about Paterno knowing about a boy being sexually molested were made by Andy Staples at Sports Illustrated, numerous commentators at ESPN including Stuart Scott, Jay Bilas, and others. All statements made at a time when they nor anyone else had one shred of proof that Paterno knew what they say he knew. And if true justice were to prevail, Gregory,his editor and many other so called journalists would lose their jobs for their fabricated, dishonest, and factually challenged reporting.
It is a virtual certainty media outlets like ESPN, Time Magazine and others whose journalists who defamed and libeled Paterno would settle out of court rather than risk having a jury speak and probably award many millions more than what they could settle for. And Paterno, once they agreed to settle, could donate all the money to worthy children's charities. The purpose of the libel suits would be principle and a principle worth suing over, but the money Paterno would get would also do a lot of good for a lot of charities and help a lot of children and in the end that would be justice too since it was in defense of children that the media justified its smearing and libeling of Joe Paterno.
In all probability Paterno wont sue. Certainly if Paterno was actually guilty of what those in the mob said he was guilty of, Paterno's firing and everything that happened subsequently would be appropriate. But Paterno from the first day said otherwise, said he didn't know the details or ANY, specifics of what McQuery saw and reported what McQueary told him, as he was supposed to, legally and morally to his superior, the AD and in effect, the chief of Penn State campus police, the police agency with sole jurisdiction.
Paterno should sue for libel. Not only to defend his name but to mete out justice and punishment to those who trample the civil rights of others so effortlessly for their own self aggrandizement because they think they can and get away with it and in the process do tremendous damage, as all mobs do, solely because of their stupidity and ignorance.
Paterno won't sue. But he should.
UPDATE: We can now add a writer named Jemele Hill to the list of the sanctimonious and factually challenged and dishonest sportswriters, who, if standards of fact meant anything in journalism would lose her job as well. Writing for ESPN on Nov. 22, Hill wrote a peice about all the negative email she has received because of the story she wrote attacking Paterno. Hill wrote in her Nov 22 peice, " I anticipated that since the story is centered on his (Paterno's) knowledge of and reaction to the alleged sexual abuse of children".
Notice how she treats Paterno's "knowledge of sexual abuse of children" as fact when we know that Hill hasnt got a shred of evidence to back that up. But even more bizarre is that Hill calls the actual sexual abuse "alleged". In her mind Paterno's knowledge of the abuse is fact but the abuse itself is only "alleged". This is either ESPN's legal guidelines telling her to use the word "alleged" to protect them from being sued by Sandusky if he ever got an acquital, or Hill's own twisted point of view. But in attacking Paterno the sexual abuse is "alleged" but Paterno's knowledge of the abuse is fact.
Also somehow in Hill's journalistic fantasy world. the boy that McQueary witnessed with Sandusky in the shower has now become many and many instances.. In Jemele Hill's world Paterno not only knew of child sexual abuse with Sandusky at Penn State( that maybe didnt really happen) and did nothing about it, but Paterno's known about other cases of sexual abuse with other children and did nothing about that either.
Without a single fact or a shred of evidence to back it up. Or even the suggestion of any evidence.
The mob mentality is always the mentality that keeps justice from being done. And it's always based on ignorance. What always motivates the mob is their own perverted and sanctimonious ideas of justice and what is true which excludes the facts and due process and substitutes their own beliefs and in many instances outright lies to justify their mob behavior.
The storyline concocted by the journalistic mob, the lie they repeat over and over again to themselves and those watching or reading to justify their mob mentality is that Joe Paterno knew a 10 year old boy was being raped in the shower and did no more than report it to the AD. This of course is an out and out lie, but a lie that allows the mob to carry their torches, feel holier than thou and delude themselves into thinking they are acting nobly.
This lie was repeated so often by so many people in the media they have accepted it as fact. And the mob is so convinced they are on the side of right that they did not once stop and think that they had no proof. Thinking is not an attribute of a mob. Which is why they are always wrong. It should be noted that Linda Kelly the Pennyslvania Attorney General has singled out Tim Curley the AD to whom Paterno reported McQueary's allegations, and Gary Schultz, Penn State's senior vice president for finance as the culprits, the ones who didnt do their jobs and who shirked their responsibilities in notifying the police. Both have been indicted. But not Paterno. No mention of Paterno by the Attorney General who does have the facts, when discussing who she holds accountable.
The trustees, displaying none of the values Penn State is supposed to stand for, nevertheless caved in to the mindless mob of psuedo-moralistic journalistsbecause they couldnt stand the pressure. They threw Joe Paterno to the mob.
What happened to Joe Paterno was not justice. It was mob justice. When it comes to any mob it is always justice, they say, that motivates them. And the news media mob is no different. But like all phony moralists and mobs everywhere their actions are inevitably immoral. They use morality as the excuse for their immorality. And so their ideas of justice produce injustice. Which is what happens with a mob of people too cowardly to stand alone but get brave in a mob.
On ESPN Lou Holtz became the only one who told the truth. He said over and over again in answer to questions, " I don't have all the facts...". Does anyone in the news media have facts that Lou Holtz didn't? Any of the sanctimonious ESPN journalists or those at other media outlets calling for Paterno's head? The answer is no. But when you're a member of the mob you dont need facts.
And while not having the facts kept Holtz from joining the mob, it didn't stop anyone else at ESPN, or Sports Illustrated or Time Magazine for that matter from carrying their burning torches demanding Paterno's head in the name of morality.
I have a friend who is not into sports and knows nothing about college football. But with all the media coverage over the last few days, the television reports, the front pages stories, the stories at online media sites, catching glimpses of headlines and pictures but without actually reading the articles, based on what she was exposed to she thought Joe Paterno was the one who had molested the young boy.
I explained that what she was seeing was actually Joe Paterno being molested by the media.
As of this writing still no one knows for sure what Paterno was told and exactly what he knew, but the sanctimonious moralists pretend they did and Paterno is gone.
Paterno wanted to clear the air and will tell exactly what he was told. But the university muzzled him, then threw him overboard to satisfy the media mob of phony moralists without anyone knowing for certain what he knew.
What is even more amazing, is that, now that the goal of the mob has been reached, after all the damage has been done, an ESPN anchor led into the a segment entitled, "Was firing Joe Paterno the wrong thing to do"? I didn't bother to watch. The segment was repeated on "Outside the Lines".
As a matter of justice there is an easy way to look at the actions of the mindless mob of journalists and judge it by asking this question: If Tim Curley, the AD Paterno went to with the information he gave him had called the police and Sandusky was arrested in 2002 would Paterno have been fired? Would any of this even be a story? Would people be saying he didnt do enough? The obvious answer is no. So Paterno was fired, not for what he didn't do, but for what Tim Curley didn't do. And its worth noting it was Tim Curley and Gary Shultz who was indicted. But it was Paterno that the press chose to attack. Because, as a friend said, Paterno had a reputation worth destroying and Tim Curley didnt.
To make the point even clearer, a reader pointed out that the boy's mother did in fact go to the DA, a man by the name of Ray Gricar, in 1998 with Sandusky's admission that he had molested her son. And what did Gricar do? He did nothing. Ray Gricar, the DA ignored the evidence of Sandusky's molestion in 1998 and yet he isn't even mentioned by the torch carriers at ESPN, Sports Illustrated and Time.Instead its the fiction that it was Paterno's inaction that allowed a predator to go free all these years. How many journalists who called for Paterno to be fired even knows the name Ray Gricar?
And even if they did, the name Ray Gricar does not sell newspapers, get ratings or web site hits. The name Joe Paterno does. So while the mob was busy attacking Paterno for his so called moral failures for which they had no proof, they've made no mention of a DA who was told of the molestation in 1998 by the boy's mother and did nothing. And what about the boy's own mother? She went to the DA and he did nothing and so she dropped it for 13 years? If it was me I wouldnt stop until justice was done. And what could the mother have done? How about going to the, uh, you know, the news media. What do you think a reporter on the Daily News, the paper that splashed Paterno's picture all over the front page with the word "Shame" would have done with a mother of a young boy telling him Jerry Sandusky, defensive coordinator for Penn State for 26 years admitted to her he had molested her son and the DA has done nothing? How many people do you think he would have run over jumping over his desk running to tell his editor?
The mother could have gone to any print or TV reporter and that story would have exploded in 1998 and tremendous pressure would have been put on the DA to DO something. She could have gotten a lawyer herself to handle it. But its Joe Paterno who had a sanitized, watered down version of what McQuery saw and reported it to his superrio who didnt do enough.
The news media went after Paterno and didnt lay a glove on the mother for only one reason -- cowardice. They were afraid of a backlash if they attacked the mother for not doing enough even though she didnt, and there may have been some sense of sympathy but if she had done the things she should have done, this would never have happened. So much for moral responsibility. And moral failures. And courageous journalism.
The refrain that Paterno knew what was going in the shower and shirked his responsibilites, is so utterly stupid and has become so pervasive that even when presented with a different set of facts that might call that into question, anchors at ESPN sing the old refrain. An ESPN reporter Thursday morning told the anchor that Joe Paterno intends to speak and clear the air about exactly what he knew and what he was told. The anchor in wrapping up the segment said, " we are all looking forward to hearing Joe Paterno give us an explanation as to what he did not do and why".
Another member of the mob, Sean Gregory, wrote in Time Magazine:
" By failing to alert authorities that Sandusky, his long time assistant allegedly raped a 10 year old boy in the Penn State football showers Paterno simplified the board's decision indeed".
Where to start with this journalistically corrupt and factually dishonest piece of nonsense except to say any smear merchant or fascist government propaganda machine would say "well done".
First we know that Gregory himself, an alleged journalist, had no facts to support what he wrote and that all the known facts available at present contradict everything he wrote. There is no evidence that Paterno knew a 10 year old boy was being raped. None. But that didn't stop a hack journalist from saying so anyway.
The grand jury, prosecutor and attorney general, the only people presently in possession of all the known evidence essentially say Sean Gregory is a liar and that Paterno never had any such knowledge. If he had he would have been indicted and in fact Paterno himself says he was not told of the specific nature of what McQuery saw.
The second piece of Sean Gregory nonsense is that Paterno didn't report what he knew to "authorities". Everyone knows he did report it. Gregory just doesn't like the authority Paterno reported to which was the AD who, by the way, had direct access to the head of campus police.It was Tim Curry who didnt act, but its Joe Paterno in the mind of Sean Gregory, who is supposed to be everyone's daddy.
Penn State's board of trustees simply buckled in the face of a news media with the values of a Sean Gregory and took the cowards way out by throwing Joe Paterno to the mob because, as they essentially admitted, they couldn't take the pressure anymore.
One last point. If there is any question, any doubt as to the cowardice of the Penn State trustees in dismissing Paterno and that it was done soley because they buckled under pressure and that their decision had nothing to do with culpability, if there is,any question about the true injustice and immorality surrounding the decision to fire Joe Paterno it's answered by this: Mike McQuery, the assistant coach who was the eyewitness to Sandusky's child assault, the person who saw it but didn't intervene or try and stop it, the person who didn't go to the police but instead went to Paterno the next day with a sanitized and watered down version of what he saw, this person had his job until he was placed on leave when people started questioning why the trustees hadnt fired him.
If you want culpability what about the parents? This has been going on for 13 years. Thirteen years. I know one of the mothers went to the DA and the DA did nothing but if it was my kid I wouldnt stop until something was done. Id go to the newspapers if I had to. Id take Sandusky on publicly. But I wouldnt stop till something was done. You could make a good case that the parents didnt do enough. And what about the DA who did nothing? Not only didnt he do enough, he did nothing. Then there is Tim Curley the AD and Gary Shultz two administrators at Penn State who did nothing.
Joe Paterno was a football coach. He is not their daddy. He is not CSI. He is not the DA. He is not the president of the university and he is not the Athletic Director or an administrator and he is not a cop. He was a football coach. By going to the Athletic Director with the sanitized waterdown version of events given to him by Mike McQueary which did NOT include knowing a 10 year old boy was anally raped no matter how much the media and the likes of a Sean Gregory want to lie and say he did, Paterno did all he was supposed to, legally AND morally.There was no reason for him to believe Tim Curley would do nothing and it was not his job , especially based on what he knew, to look over Curley's shoulder.
When it comes to morality and integrity just about everyone knows that Paterno has more of it in his pinky than all the commentators and phony moralists in the media have in their whole bodies combined. Because when it comes to the immoralistic mob, what matters most, what makes them feel the biggest, is when they get the chance to think they are morally superior. And the bigger the person they can bring down the better. Which always comes out making them look small.
UPDATE: ESPN is reporting (Friday) that a trustee has told them Joe Paterno was fired solely because of media pressure and scrutiny which they felt was bad for the university. They voted to fire Paterno to end it. So, as postulated here, Paterno is gone because of everyone's sins but his own.
If there is one thing we have come to expect from the press its that when it comes to almost any big story they will miss what's important and what matters in place of those who will seize the opportunity for their own self-serving, sanctimonious, self-righteous reasons to try and make a name for themselves.
That is exactly what is going on now with the phony moralistic and imbecilic calls by factually challenged sportswriters and other journalists, not exactly known for their ability to think in the first place, for Joe Paterno the coach of Penn State football, to resign or be fired over a child abuse scandal involving a former defensive coach at Penn State.
The fact that, based on all the facts presently known, Paterno did nothing wrong, not in any imaginable way, doesn't stop the sanctimonious, self-righteous pseudo-moralistic members of the press from piling on over an issue for which they feel safe in piling on.
Here is what we and self-serving sports writers like Andy Staples for Sports Illustrated, Bob Ford, and others know. We and they know we don't have all the facts but that the prosecutors and grand jury do. We and they know that the grand jury, the body who does have all the facts, handed down indictments, one involving the abuser and two involving two Penn State officials who were charged with perjury for covering up one of the incidents and were indicted for failure to report sexual abuse. After hearing all the evidence including testimony by Joe Paterno, the grand jury did not indict Joe Paterno for anything.
Based on all the facts at the grand jury's disposal Paterno did nothing wrong. And the Pennsylvania State Attorney General said as much as well.
But if you want to pretend youre a moral hero, if you are self-serving and sanctimonious and looking to beat your chest about something, that isnt good enough. That also wont sell newspapers, get TV ratings, or get website hits the way going after a figure like Joe Paterno would. And the justification by these factually challenged journalists who are trying to do something journalists have proved they are incapable of doing in the first place -- think -- is that while Paterno did nothing criminally wrong he was morally wrong in not reporting what he heard to the police.
The problem with that is the need to answer the question, "heard what"?
Perhaps these journalists are not aware that it is in fact a crime -- a felony -- to know about child abuse and not report it. We have seen that repeatedly with the serial and institutional child sexual abuse in the Catholic church. We know that those in the hierarchy of the church who knew about the abuse by priests and did nothing are being held accountable.
The grand jury, the only body in possession of all the facts ( and the indictment is NOT all the facts - only evidence and testimony given to the grand jury contains all the facts and that is secret) decided that Paterno is blameless and committed no crime. At the same time the grand jury indicted two Penn State officials for not doing what the sanctimonious is saying Joe Paterno also didnt do but should have -- report abuse. So with no facts to support it a group of self appointed self-rightous journalists posing as moralists are calling for Paterno to be fired.
According to them Paterno should be fired for not doing what the grand jury held Paterno blameless for not doing -- going to the police with nothing.
The incident in question was witnessed by an assistant coach who actually saw the abuse take place. This coach - an eyewitness -- did NOT go to the police with what he saw but the press is giving him a pass anyway. Why? Because he is not a big fish. Because he is not going to embellish anyone's reputation. Because pointing the finger at him is not going allow sanctimonious journalists to stick out their chests the way the morally sanctimonious always do. Going after the person who actually the saw the abuse and did nothing but who is a lowly assistant coach wouldn't put a feather in the cap of those like Andy Staples, Bob Ford, or the editorial writers of the Philadelphia Daily News. Going after the witness who did nothing doesnt allow them to strut their "moral superiority" but going after Paterno gives them the opportunity to say, "look ma, I'm a hero".
So they go after Paterno, who according to his testimony and public statement had no details or specifics of what this coach saw because the coach never told him. This is an excerpt from Paterno's statement:
" He ( McCreary, the eyewitness) at no time related to me the very specific actions contained in the grand jury report:".
The grand jury investigation which included calling McCreary as a witness as well as Paterno and the two Penn State officials eventually indicted, concluded Paterno's statement was the truth and that Paterno fullfilled all his obligations in reporting what he knew to the Penn State Athletic Director and not the police.
But that still isn't enough for the railroading press. According to them Paterno should have gone to the police anyway. But they never say with what. An incident he didn't see and for which he had no details or specifics? What exactly was he supposed to say to the police? The sanctimonious in the press calling for Paterno's dismissal never say.
The mother of the boy who was sexually abused by Sandusky issued a public statement yesterday. In it she said that Sandusky in 1998 "admitted to my face - he admitted it", that he had sexually abused her son. She said in the same statement that Sandusky admitted the abuse to her again in 2002. What did the mother do? Nothing. Did she go to the police with this specific admission? No. But Paterno was supposed to with none of the facts the mother had.
So we have an assistant coach who actually witnessed the incident but didn't report it to the police and the mother of the victim who was told twice over a 4 year span by the abuser himself that he had abused her son and neither went to the police. But Paterno, who didn't have a fraction of the information those two had, and didnt have a fraction of the moral responsibility of the boy's own mother,was supposed to do more than the boy's own mother did. And should be fired for not doing so.
McCreary and the boy's mother are clearly the ones who should have gone to the police but they are given a pass by the press because there is no money or moral superiority to be had by going after them. But going after Paterno who didn't know a thing about any specific act of abuse, well, that's a gold mine.
The justification being used for attacking Paterno is that while he may have done nothing wrong criminally he was morally wrong in not reporting it to the police. Again, these factually challenged journalists are oblivious to the fact that what they say is morally wrong -- not reporting it to the police -- is also criminally wrong. To restate the facts, not reporting child abuse is a felony. The fact that the grand jury didnt indict Paterno for not reporting abuse to police while indicting two Penn State officials for that very thing, is proof that those in possession of all the facts decided that there was nothing Paterno should have done that he didnt do.
With the press when it comes to controversy its always about cowardice and what they think they can get away with to sell newspapers, get ratings or website hits as long as they feel safe against retribution. They had nothing to say about irrefutable evidence that Bush lied the country into war but they got real tough with Anthony Weiner over a picture of his underwear. They put Joe Paterno's picture on the front page of the Philadephia Daily News with the word "Shame" in huge type but never a picture of the present Pope with the same word after we learned that the present Pope had known about the Wisconsin priest who sexually abused over 400 deaf children over 20 years and did nothing.
Sandusky no doubt will get what's coming to him if he is guilty. Its too bad the same cant be said about journalists like Andy Staples, Bob Ford and the rest of the press especially those at ESPN who threw due process, common sense, facts and journalistic integrity out the window for their own self-serving reasons. But one can always hope.
NOTE: This morning on ESPN, Karl Ravich an ESPN anchor made an inadvertent but stunning admisson that bears out the premise of this peice. Ravich pointed out that all of the media attention is being focused on Joe Paterno, and almost forgotten is Jerry Sandusky, the person actually indicted for engaging in the sexual abuse. Ravich made the point that while Sandusky will eventually have his day in court, for now they can't advance the story using Sandusky so all the attention is being focused on Joe Paterno. Obviously to, as Ravich said, advance the story.And milk it. At Joe Paterno's expense. And their own self-aggrandizement.
This isn't about politics. It's about race. Because when it comes to Barrack Obama it is always about race.
It was the agenda of many in the upper echelons of the Democratic party and certainly the news media to support Obama because of race, even to the point of rigging the 2008 primary process because what became most important was romanticizing the symbolism of a candidate with African ancestry being elected president.
The fact that the candidate with black ancestry had proved repeatedly that he was the most underhanded, dishonest duplicitous unqualified and untrustworthy candidate the Democrats ever had was, unfortunately for the country and subsequently, for the Democratic party, besides the point at the time for those who supported him. And in many instances still seems to be besides the point to those who don't want to admit the huge mistake it was in supporting Obama as the nominee.
A perfect example is a recent email mailing by MoveOn. org. dated Nov.2.
"some members of the Obama administration—including members of his Cabinet—are pushing for a terrible deal to let the big banks off the hook for selling bad mortgages and then illegally foreclosing on homeowners—destroying the American Dream for millions of families.1
The president's top campaign advisors have said that he's going to run for re-election on his record of holding Wall Street accountable2—but that'll be impossible if his administration pushes for another giveaway for the Wall Street banks who crashed our economy. And that could happen any day now.3
Can you sign our petition to President Obama right now telling him that we need a full investigation into the banks' wrongdoing, not another "deal" that lets them off the hook? "
Notice how its everyone's fault BUT Obama's. Its "some members in his administration" as if "some members" have the authority to make policy and poor Obama cant do a thing about it. Not to mention that the "some members" who are pushing for a bad deal are there because Obama chose them. Its almost as if MoveOn feels Obama has nothing to say about it and is a victim of those around him ( a subliminally racist idea if there ever was one). And notice their repeated use of the word "another". "Another giveaway to the banks". "another deal that lets them off the hook". Well, where do they think these other bad deals came from? Outer space? Who do they think is responsible for them? Newt Gingrich?
Along with MoveOn's deep denial about their own responsibility in Obama being where he is, and their denial that Obama has anything to do with all the bad decisions that sold out the Democrats agenda, they want one more useless petition telling Obama not to sell liberals and Democrats down the river. As if Obama hadn't already did just that so many times you'd think those in MoveOn has to have been in a coma the last three years not to know it.
Their blindness to who Obama is, their ignoring his being caught in lie after lie from the time he started running for president, to all his selling out of Democrats and the liberal agenda since he has been in office, is the reason Clinton supporters referred to Obama supporters as "drinking the Kool-Aid". These supporters were willing to be, or small minded enough to be, and seemingly still are, bamboozled by an empty and duplicitous garden variety politician with no ideas, no moral outrage, and who has demonstrated for years he has no principles or convictions. The reason for their denial and refusal to hold Obama accountable for all the damage he's done to Democrats and their agenda is of course, race.
As Geraldine Ferraro said during the 2008 primaries, if Obama had been white he'd be considered a joke as a presidential candidate. For telling the truth Ferraro was labeled a racist by the media and Obama supporters. But no one is laughing at the joke now. Maybe because they stilll dont get it.
But with Herman Caine's surge in the polls putting him in a tie with Mitt Romney for the lead for the Republican presidential nomination, Obama supporting Democrats might wake up and realize they can no longer use race as their rationale for supporting Obama. They cant feel any moral superiority for supporting a candidate with black ancestry. They can't go home and pat themselves on the back anymore and somehow feel morally superior in supporting a president with more character flaws than Richard Nixon, simply because of his African ancestry.
Herman Caine, for those who care about race, is twice as black as Obama and he is getting more support for president than any other Republican candidate and he is getting it from the avowed enemy -- white Republican conservatives.
And that could mean a problem for Obama. Democrats who support Obama can no longer claim ownership of the race issue as a reason to continue to support him.
Like it or not, with race peeled away and a non-factor, Obama Democrats may be be forced for the first time to judge Obama, as Martin Luther King admonished 50 years ago, by the content of his character and not the color of his skin. And if they do they won't like what they see.
Because with Caine's emergence, support for Obama can no longer be propped up or justified by race or what Obama's supporters think it says about them for supporting him. With Caine's surge in the polls to virtual front runner status among Republicans that is completely gone. And with it, finally, and thankfully, the idea of race as a reason to judge or support anyone. And that could be big trouble for Obama among Democrats, many of whom are already fed up with his presidency.
NOTE: The recent sexual harrassment stories about settlements reached with 3 women in the 1990's have so far had no effect on Cain's poll numbers. No one knows what the substance of the allegations are and unless they are released and prove to be serious they probably won't mean anything in the long run. In any event they still do not undermine the basic premise that Democrats can no longer claim moral superiorty in their support of Obama because of race even if bad behavior in Cain's past does him in. That is gone forever.