Joseph Vincent Paterno - Not Michael Corleone: Introduction & Part I - The Media

I have spent the better part of the last week trying to wrap my head around the allegations that have my beloved Nittany Lion family in such disarray and turmoil.  Through happenstance, I have had the opportunity to view the allegations and the “facts” as they have been reported in light of the birth of my second son on November 6, 2011.  As I have examined and digested the various stories, rumors, allegations, and rhetoric, I have reached a few basic conclusions.  Some of you will agree and some will not.  Some will demonize me, and others will call me naïve.  But, hopefully, some of you will simply read and reflect.  You see, as I sit here drinking from my Penn State Football 2005 Big Ten Champion glass, and wearing my Penn State Blue Band t-shirt, I am in great conflict as I attempt to be objective about this entire debacle, particularly when I know exactly what I would do to anyone who even came close to causing any injury to my sons, sexually or otherwise. 

I strive to draw from pragmatism to reach my conclusions, regardless of how emotionally charged a situation may be.  I do this by accepting the central premise that emotions can never be wrong – they are what they are and we feel how we feel.  It is how we react to emotion or, by contrast, how we act upon emotion that determines whether we can be pragmatic in any given situation.  If we simply react to emotion, no matter the outcome of that reaction, our decision is wrong because we have allowed emotion to cause us to introduce thoughtless instability to the situation.  When we attempt to understand our emotions, attempt to comprehend why we feel the way we feel, being brutally honest with ourselves, we can then act (or speak) based on those feelings.

So, without further ado, I give you my take on this mess.  I have tried to place myself in the shoes of the various types of concerned individuals who have weighed in since this case has broken open.  I have broken them into three (3) basic categories: (1) Media, (2) Outsiders, and (3) Penn State family and friends.

The Media: When I read the news that PSU had decided to fire Joe Pa, I was happier than ever to see that the students overturned a news van.  In essence, that single act expresses my feelings about how the media has acted in this entire situation.  As I stated above, I did not get the information about this entire scandal in real time like everyone else, as I was at the hospital with my wife and new born son.  That has offered a very interesting perspective on all of this.  As I read the headlines, not knowing what had happened, I would have sworn that Joe Pa himself had molested a bunch of children.  In fact, in all of this, I had trouble finding any articles about the actual offender, or that even referenced his name in the title.  As I listened to the various “news” outlets, I discovered that Joe’s status was the most prominent issue for discussion, not the police department that refused to prosecute years earlier, not McQueary, who apparently actually saw something happening and did nothing to stop it at that moment (and Mike is a pretty big guy), not even Sandusky himself and the fact that he has positioned himself for decades to be around children.

I wondered what this all meant.  Is the general premise that we love a good scandal and to see the righteous fall controlling here?  One listen to the C4 show on 1090 AM WBAL radio in Baltimore convinced me that something bigger was at work here.  C4, with whom I agree on most issues, political and otherwise, was commenting on the fact that Paterno went to Tim Curley, the athletic director, after hearing a very non-specific report from a former player about something that happened in one of the athletic building shower rooms a day after the event had apparently transpired.  C4 then went on to state that “Paterno instructed Curley” to cover this up!  “That’s the only logical conclusion” according to C4.  As I continued to listen to other radio stations, internet videos and television news reports, I discovered the common theme in the media regarding this entire situation – that Joe Pa had secured power over the span of 50+ years at Penn State and would do anything not to have to relinquish it, including purposefully burying allegations of a pedophilic sexual assault.  Somehow, in the span of a week, at the beginning of which everyone was praising Joe for reaching 409 wins and doing it the right way, Joe Pa has gone from St. Joe to Michael Corleone – at least that’s how the media portrays it.  As I read the various reports, postings, blogs, and other media outlets, one could only conclude that the new Don Corleone apparently had actual, first-hand knowledge of all of the wrongdoings of Sandusky for the past 17 years, that he convinced the local and university police to look the other way, and that he instructed the PSU administrators (who are clearly under the Don’s thumb) to bury everything, specifically to protect Penn State Football and his power.  This is the “logic” employed by C4 and the general media. 

Of course, the media’s logic fails miserably when one considers that at the time Joe Pa was actually informed of some type of wrong doing by his former defensive coordinator, Sandusky was no longer a coach, nor involved with the football team.  His presence on campus was a benefit conferred by the administration, not Joe, and it is a benefit conferred on many professors at PSU who retire and maintain emeritus status.  So, given Joe’s perceived power, on the day he heard the story from McQueary, had he convened the local district attorney and police force for a meeting with Graham Spanier and the Board of Trustees, which of course, the Don could do, and Sandusky was dragged out of his office and shipped off to prison to be held pending trial, what embarrassment would there have been to Paterno or Penn State Football?  What embarrassment would there be to the university?  The simple answer is that there would be NO embarrassment – None at all!  Now, Joe Pa, being a Brown University educated man would certainly have known that.  Which leads to only one conclusion that actually employs true logic – not the speculation in which C4 and others in the media have engaged and propagated.  Paterno believed he was doing what was appropriate under the circumstances.

What is “known” and/or corroborated is that Sandusky was present on campus by virtue of his status as professor emeritus.  He was no longer a coach, and was not involved with the football team.  On March 1, 2002, Mike McQueary personally witnessed what can only be described as grotesque activities involving Sandusky and a boy of an unascertainable age.  A day later, McQueary talked to Joe, in non-specific terms, about what he saw.  Joe then informed the athletic director, Tim Curley, who retained authority over all persons in the department, including Sandusky.  We know that Tim Curley and Gary Schultz met with Mike McQueary (i.e. going to the horse’s mouth) to “investigate,” and later told McQueary that Sandusky's locker room keys had been taken away and that the incident had been reported to The Second Mile.

Now, what would have happened if Joe Pa had called the police at the exact moment that McQueary reported that he had witnessed something?  Well, first of all, he would have called the University Police who had jurisdiction.  The University Police would have bypassed Joe Pa to speak with the actual eye-witness, and would have followed its protocol, which undoubtedly included notifying the administration.

What actually happened?  Joe Pa contacted Curley, who was his superior, and the University Police became involved by way of Schultz, who oversaw the University Police.  McQeary was then questioned – not Joe Pa, as he witnessed nothing!  What Curley and Schultz did from there is on them, but one can only assume that they would have done exactly what they ended up doing, regardless of to whom Joe Pa reported what was reported to him.

So, when we remove the media’s fabricated back-story – let’s call it the Corleone Conspiracy Theory – Joe would have been in the same boat whether he called Curley or the University Police directly.  So, for the conspiracy theorists (“CT”) – why did Joe contact Curley?  The CT would say that he went to Curley to instruct and oversee a cover-up.  Of course, if Joe Pa had contacted 911 and gotten a local University Police Officer to investigate, the CT would undoubtedly be reporting that Joe Pa should have used his vast power to find a higher up, perhaps one Mr. Schultz, to oversee the investigation. 

Now we will employ real logic.  Consider that Joe just received an apparently vague hearsay report about a friend he had known for at least 3 decades – someone he trusted.  What did Joe Pa have to weigh in this situation?  A false report of abuse is just as damning to the accused and his career as a true report.  We owe this, of course, to our rush-to-judgment media.  Had Joe Pa witnessed the event reported by McQueary with his own eyes, and not attempted to stop it or at least call for help to have someone else stop it, than by all means, fire him in disgrace.  But, Joe Pa DID NOT WITNESS IT.  He did the prudent and appropriate thing, and before destroying another man’s career with no personally observed evidence, he went to the highest up in the department to report what he had heard and allowed due process to proceed. 

The CT’s response to this is that the lives of the children are more important than a man’s career or due process – unless of course the accused is innocent, but then it’s too late.  And before we buy into that nonsense, let’s remember that the Grand Jury was convened for an extended period of time, while what appears to be far more damning evidence was in the possession of the prosecution, yet Sandusky was not arrested.  Who was protecting the children then?  With all of the State’s prosecutorial power and police control, why wasn’t Sandusky arrested and arraigned without indictment?  They had the means and ability to do so.  What of all of the children who were not protected while Sandusky remained free during the investigation and even after posting bail.  The answer – this country subscribes to due process and the basic liberty that all persons are innocent until proven guilty.  Anyone who has heard about how Joe Pa has handled players with charges levied against them knows that he has always believed in letting due process take its course.

So, employing logic absent the Corleone Conspiracy Theory, what did Joe Pa do wrong?  The media’s last remaining attack is that he should have followed up.  That’s right, he should have conducted his own personal investigation to determine who the victim was and absolutely should have personally called Sandusky to call him out on all of this.  How absurd can one be?  When I called the police after seeing a guy ram another car on I 97 near Baltimore and reported it, did I follow up?  Should I have?  I don’t know if the police did their job that day.  Am I complicit in the ramming because I didn’t follow up to be sure the victim was properly represented and protected?  Indeed, this is a simple example, but what would the result have been if Joe Pa asked Curley, “Hey, what ever happened with that?”  Would Curley have told Joe Pa – “yeah, we covered the whole thing up to protect you and the school.”?  The one thing that we know from football is that the team plays far better when each player minds his responsibilities and doesn’t try to do anyone else’s job.  Again, the CT says, “but Joe Pa said that he wished he had done more or should have done more…”  Ya think?  Do you think the Maryland State Trooper who stopped one of the 9/11 terrorists for a traffic violation just before the attacks didn’t think, in retrospect, “I should have done more”?  Hindsight is 20/20, and the idea that anyone should be required to be a soothsayer and somehow see a future tragedy (for example a cover-up) and be able to somehow prevent it smacks of Sci-Fi, not reality.

What is really happening here?  I don’t think that it is just the desire to be involved in a good scandal or to see the righteous fall…  While this includes those factors, I think overall, this is much larger than just those desires.  It is the reason that a blizzard gets 24/7 news coverage even after the snow has melted.  It is the reason that we can turn on the news any given night and find some reporter acting like the latest event is the greatest tragedy ever.  The media serves itself.  It doesn’t care who it tramples.  The writers/bloggers/reporters and various other talking heads have one interest in mind – winning a Pulitzer, or an Emmy, or whatever other award that they can boast and place on their mantle.  Why else would every story be about Joe Pa and not Sandusky?  It sells better when it’s about Joe Pa.  The media has no interest in truth – just the ability to catch the reader or the viewer and sell some “news”.

So, objectively, I refuse to place any stock in what the media has to say with the exception of the most basic facts in any situation.  Sometimes even those are skewed, as media figures often only offer those facts that render their opinions in the most favorable light.  To you C4 and the majority of the ESPN writers, YOU should be ashamed.  You should be forced to leave your job and legacy not in disgrace, but BECAUSE you are a disgrace.