Well, I think it's a mistake to think that anyone who doesn't share your opinion of Joe has not read a lot of the documents and does not understand the scandal. A lot of what I have read like GJ testimony, trial testimony etc was neither pro nor anti Joe. I have read much more than the just the media reports and as I said have my opinion.
Frankly I don't buy all the "they were all out to get Joe" ideas but I know I am on a PSU website so I don't argue about it. I may from time to time ask questions and other than that stay fairly low profile as an outsider should.
However, I don't blame the fans of PSU nor do I think they should be harassed in public. They had nothing to do with it and have every right to be proud of their school.
I'm not sure there's anything beyond a transcript of Joe's GJ testimony to clarify how anyone can form an opinion of Joe in regards to Sandusky. And you'd have to acknowledge a lot of how you read that testimony is based on how it has been "described" in the media.
one thing you should probably understand about the "they were all out to get Joe" narrative is that it really started in 2004. Joe felt he had no supporters on the BoT back then. And there were several powerful people (Surma, Peetz, Frazier) who had very powerful motives to throw Joe to the wolves. But what I was saying is that most of what you read that reflects negatively on Joe does originate from those people, and their allies.
I'll give a good example. A lot of people put a lot of stock in Vicky Triponey. "The woman who stood up to Joe Paterno!!" great story except it was complete BS. They disagreed on how football players should be punished by the school. Guess what? No one ever mentions the school did an audit after Triponey was fired and found that their best practices and policies were in line with what Paterno wanted. No one ever mentions Triponey was reviled at UConn when she was VP of student affairs, or that she was widely reviled by many student organizations when she was at Penn State. Joe wasn't the only person she rubbed the wrong way.
Let's also mention that in the 61 years Joe was at Penn State, as a coach, educator, philanthropist, and de facto spokesperson for the University, only 2 faculty members/administrators have emerged to say anything negative about him. Again, widely doesn't get reported.
If you have an opinion based on some solid facts and logic, I don't think you would get too slammed here for expressing it. you might get challenged on it, and I guarantee I've read a lot more than you on the Sandusky scandal (I honestly wish I hadn't. too many late nights wasted pouring over trial testimony, Ziggy rants, Blehar reports, Freeh nonsense) . . . I am confident there is nothing out there that denigrates Joe's legacy and PLENTY that supports the narrative that he was not at fault for what happened.
on a final note, I can same much of the same for Curley, Spanier, and Schultz. I've seen nothing remotely credible to indicate they were fully aware McQueary was credibly telling them Sandusky has molested a young boy. And they, for the most part, have yet to tell their side of the story. I will tell you this, I know for a FACT they have proof of their innocence. and a lot exculpatory information was magically excluded from the Freeh Report.
