Re: In the news - Sandusky at Penn State

In part I agree with Seamus.

Paterno's duty to report doesn't end within the Campus Police system.

If he himself reported an activity he had no personal evidence of, it would be hearsay, and could be grounds for libel. But in this case, he needs to report that there is someone who claims to be a witness to illegal conduct. The assistant's testimony shouldn't have waited until a Grand Jury to come to the attention of the authorities outside of the campus.

However, there are a couple of things to consider here.

Paterno is being fired for "not doing enough to stop it;" not for failure to report, or for not following procedure. This hyperbolic accusation almost demands that he take "justice" into his own hands if any charges are dismissed or any settlements made. Time and time again we are reminded that our duty is to follow the process and accept the legitimate results of the system. In this case, the Board of Trustees is exaggerating his requirement to include the preordained results.

This is indicative of them covering their own reputations. If they truly believed that the problem was systemic, and that they have the power to appoint and fire those beneath them in the system, then they ought to remove themselves. But hey, this isn't Japan.

And further, the tradition that one's duty is to report to the authorities and accept that they will "take it from there" is based on the attempt to absolve the "reporter" from responsibility for the ultimate consequences of their actions. The Milgram Experiment established that far too many people will accept that its the "authorities" who are responsible for the punishments within the system, not those whose actions submit strangers to those punishments.

If we can agree that there is no hysteria going on regarding adult-child sex, that consent and coercion aren't conflated, and that punishments are proportional, then we can see what is moral lining up with what is legal.

Now I have no reason to believe that Paterno thought it through to that degree. There is no reason to believe that he didn't understand that his initial reporting to Campus Police wouldn't result in the outside authorities getting involved.

If he reported to one, he should have reported to both.

But if the internal system is broken. Then the Trustees should have removed themselves as well. If "damage control" is acceptable from them, then its acceptable from others below them. Picking an underling to take the fall, especially if they're still being compensated ( as is President Spanier in his teaching position ) is an old Yakuza practice. ( Hey, maybe this is Japan? )

Dante