Awful Tom Corbett made the call to throw Paterno under the bus

Did politics play a part in the ouster of Joe Paterno as Penn State coach.

Nah. YES!

ESPN filed this dispatch from the trenches:

A 62-year-old Republican, Corbett is a blunt-spoken former prosecutor whose political career has been built pursuing powerful people who, he has said, "believe they are beyond the law." And his role in the Penn State scandal, fraught with potential conflicts, placed him in a remarkable position. As Pennsylvania's attorney general, he investigated Sandusky for nearly two years but failed to make an arrest. But then, as governor, he blamed the university's leaders for not doing more. One was Paterno, who some board members believed wielded too much power. The other was university president Graham B. Spanier, a 16-year veteran and Corbett rival who had become a vocal opponent of the governor's efforts to slash higher education funding.

To some, Corbett relished the opportunity and had even planned to play a role in managing the crisis. Eight days before the Sandusky grand jury presentment was released this past November, Corbett's staff booked hotel rooms in State College. Becoming governor had made Corbett a trustee, and he had decided to attend his first board meeting, after missing the first four. During those days of crisis in State College, he lobbied for the ouster of Paterno and Spanier, ending with that conference call on Nov. 9. And when he was on campus the next day, after Spanier's resignation and Paterno's firing, he celebrated the leadership changes. "Throughout this whole process, I felt he had some ulterior motive," a trustee says of Corbett. "Most trustees felt uncomfortable with his role. It was odd for him to be there and participate the way he did. Very odd."...

One senior member of the Penn State faculty recalls seeing Corbett, surrounded by his security detail and friends, at the American Ale House & Grill in State College on Thursday evening, Nov. 10, the night before the regularly scheduled board meeting. "He was just effusive," the faculty member says. "It was like a victory celebration. I remember thinking at the time that it just seemed a strange thing … a kind of gratuitous political piling on." The faculty member, who was sitting near Corbett and overheard much of his conversation, added that the governor "left the impression that he was much more engaged, and really influential, in the board's discussions up to that point."

On the Saturday morning of the Nov. 12 Nebraska game -- the first Penn State game without Paterno on the staff since 1949 -- Bob Capretto, a 65-year-old former Penn State player who admittedly "loves Joe Paterno," had a conversation with Corbett, whom he considers a friend. Capretto says he asked Corbett, "Who told the board to fire Joe and fire Spanier?"

"And the governor said, 'I told them to do it,'" Capretto says. "He was proud of it. I told him, 'You don't realize what you have created here. The damage to Penn State is enormous.'"

Of course, the whole investigation festered under Corbett's watch as attorney general, when as the article notes, he had one investigator investigating Jerry Sandusky while 14 were piling on in a probe of Bill DeWeese, a political enemy.

Local fans continue to gobble up Jerry Sandusky bobbleheads like hotcakes

Just when you think Penn State fans have grown a sense of shame comes this report in the morning newspaper that sales of PSU gear are selling here unabated.

One example:

Schuylkill Valley Sports, based in Pottstown, is holding out judgment on sales through the college football season.

Director of marketing Phil Baumgartner said at first they were a little cautious.

He added that sales have slowed a bit, but he believes it is a temporary thing.

"We'll see how the next month and a half go," Baumgartner said.

There must be an algorithm for this. Two more child-sex charges against Jerry Sandusky equals a 2% drop in sales times one bowl loss by the Lions equals...

It's a good thing Joe Paterno won't remember any of this very soon.

What did Tom Corbett know and when did he know it?

The Pennsylvania Progressive looks at some of the delays in the Penn State child-rape scandal probe. Specifically, the handling of the investigation by Tom Corbett, first as attorney gneral and now as governor:

His roles as AG and as a PSU Trustee are beginning to be closely examined.  Why did he give The Second Mile a $3 million state grant last summer?  Here's his explanation:

"Yes I knew this (Sandusky investigation was under way), but I could not act publicly on this without saying certain things that would have possibly compromised the investigation"

Of course the investigation was already public information by then after being exposed by The Patriot News in March.  Therefore he already knew the cat was out of the bag when he gave the grant.  Remember this is the same Governor who refused to spend $40 million to support services for developmentally disabled citizens but he had $3 million to give to an organization he knew had been involved in child molestation.

I suppose we know even more about Gov. Corbett's priorities don't we?

So it takes time to build a case?  Corbett had a boy, his mom, a high school administrator and other witnesses who saw Sandusky engaged in oral and anal sex with boys.  Let's assume at the beginning he only had the Clinton County case.  Why wasn't the guy arrested there and then?  They had a strong case which is no stronger, for that incident, than they do today.  Corbett had enough evidence then because it seems to be the same evidence as included in the grand jury presentment now.

That grand jury presentment also raises questions about timing.  It seems it was accidently posted on the Magisterial District Judge's website Friday night, sooner than planned.  Jerry Sandusky was out of town at the time and his arrest wasn't supposed to happen until he returned.  After reporters found the indictment they rushed him into court.  So we know there a delay in arresting him so as not to inconvenience the man.  WTF?

If they were willing to delay the case in that instance would they also have delayed it so Joe Paterno could get to 409 wins?  So Tom Corbett could win the Governor's race?  After all Board members of The Second Mile gave $200,000 to his gubernatorial campaign.  How much influence did that buy?  Or rather, how much time?

This is not just political horseplay.

Maybe we were never meant to read the Penn State indictment

The New York Times details the moral and ethical labyrinth Tom Corbett needed to navigate in the Penn State child-rape scandal, starting as the Pennsylvania attorney general who launched the investigation in 2009, then as governor and member of the university board of trustees, bound by grand jury secrecy laws that bar him from discussing the investigation with outsiders, even trustees he had appointed.

The next-to-last paragraph is the money graf:

On Friday, the governor finally got the word. The grand jury indictment had been filed under seal, but because of a computer glitch it had mistakenly been made public. Soon Mr. Corbett’s office was inundated with calls. Mr. (Kevin) Harley (the governor's press secretary) reached the governor in his car.

Think about it.

If the indictment had been kept under seal, the public would know that ex-Nittany Lions defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky was charged with multiple counts of molesting young boys.

But the public would not know the horrible details.

We would not know that graduate assistant Mike McQueary was an eyewitness to Sandusky raping a boy of about 10 in a Penn State shower and that McQueary had not halted the attack, but instead first notified his dad and, a day later, coach Joe Paterno.

We would not know the actions (and inactions) of Paterno, who notified athletic director Tim Curley, but not the police, nor how Curley, university vice president Gary Schultz, and university president Graham Spanier laxly responded to the dreadful allegations.

We would not know what Paterno said McQueary told him, nor how specific Curley and Schultz claimed McQueary was in describing the locker room rape.

We would not know the timeline of Sandusky's path of pedophilia over a decade and a half.

Think about it.

All of this would have been under wraps. A scandal would have enveloped the university, but the extent of the horror would have been maddeningly vague.

And no one mentioned in the indictment -- not Paterno, not Curley, not Schultz, not Spanier -- would say a word to the press. They would have, rightly, said that an investigation was ongoing, and that counsel had advised them not to comment.

The case would chug along through the courts, as it will now, but the reaction, and the outrage, would not have been so instantly intense.

The story would have lost some shock value. There would not have been the immediate clamor from the media for Paterno's ouster. He would be on the sidelines Saturday for Nebraska, possibly a Big Ten title game, and maybe hoisted atop his players' shoulders after a bowl game win.

Paterno could exit with a last hurrah, not forced out in humiliation with a 10 p.m. phone call from the trustees he never viewed as his bosses.

Penn State knew a grand jury was targeting Sandusky. Paterno knew. A scandal was inevitable. Did they also have some assurance that the indictment would be kept under wraps, the foundation of the case a mystery, while the Penn State spin machine went to work?

 And then...a computer glitch...and the kingdom was lost.

April fools

This from the Beaver County Times:

Allegations of improper conduct with an underage male first surfaced in 1998, while Sandusky was still employed by Penn State. That incident allegedly occurred in a shower at Penn State's on-campus football facility. No charges were filed.

Sandusky retired the next year, in 1999. He was 55, prime age for a coach. Odd, to say the least - especially with Joe Paterno thought even then to be ready to quit and Sandusky a likely, openly-discussed successor.

It seems logical to ask: What did Paterno know, and when did he know it? What did Penn State's administration know, and when did they know it?

Best-case scenario: Charges are never brought, and Sandusky walks away with his reputation permanently scarred. The rumors, the jokes, the sideways glances - they won't ever stop. Paterno and Penn State do the great escape.

Worst-case scenario: Sandusky is charged. Then it seems reasonable to wonder: Did Penn State not make an issue of Sandusky's alleged behavior in 1998 in exchange for him walking away from the program at an age premature for most coaches? Did Penn State's considerable influence help get Sandusky off the hook?

Don't kid yourself. That could happen. Don't underestimate the power of Paterno and Penn State in central Pennsylvania when it comes to politicians, the police and the media.

In 1999, Penn State was rid of Sandusky. His rep was unblemished, which allowed him to continue running a charitable foundation that gave him access to underage males. To be a volunteer assistant with a high school football team, thus gaining access to underage males.

If Paterno and Penn State knew, but didn't act, instead facilitating Sandusky's untroubled retirement - are Paterno and Penn State responsible for untoward acts since committed by Sandusky?

This is far from an outrageous hypothesis, especially given the convenient timeline.

Date of publication: April 3, 2011!

(Hat tip to Chris Krewson.)

Irony

From today's editorial on PennLive:

Since taking the reins in 1995, Graham Spanier has done great things for Penn State. He has built world-class facilities, added a law school, increased fundraising and strengthened the school’s reputation as a center for research.

But a leader who lacks moral authority has nothing. By doing the absolute minimum when hearing potentially serious allegations, by doing more to protect the school’s reputation than to protect children, Spanier has lost that moral authority.

Joe Paterno is a different story. That doesn’t let him off the hook. He should have done more. A man who has spoken with such affection for 46 years about “his kids” failed real kids when they needed him most.

But this incident does not undo a lifetime of achievement.

Some people will argue that Joe should step down immediately as well. Given what we know now, we don’t agree. Paterno should be allowed to finish out the year and retire with the honor and admiration he has earned since taking over as head coach in 1966.

It might always be honor with an asterisk, admiration with a shake of the head. Joe will have to live with that.

There will be other people who argue that Graham Spanier and Joe Paterno should not be punished at all. After all, they obeyed the law.

Eight little boys would have said: that simply isn’t enough.

The Reading Eagle will state its piece after Joe leaves.