[SlickRick1382]

4th: sure, i agree, he could've been willfully blind, which brings me back to my original point that willful blindness is an okay defense to your teenage kid drinking beer in the backyard with his buddies, not so okay for a far more heinous crime. i don't care if you agree with me, i'm not evangelizing. you reserve judgment as long as you want. i find the notion that Paterno is some innocent victim to be incredibly naive. he and the president will both be gone before kickoff of the UNL/PSU game. sorry for Paterno that it ends like this, so so so much more sorry for the victims, particularly those who could've been saved if Paterno had acted.

Leaving all the other points behind since we both have our own views / opinions on the matter I do agree with you here. I didn't say that Paterno couldn't of done more. I also didn't absolve him of his moral obligations. I'm merely pointing out that he seems to have garnered much more attention than the actual perp along with the administration who obviously committed a huge blunder in covering up this horrid act.

At the same time I'm leaving open the possibility that indeed he didn't know all of the facts. That he was shielded by the administration and kept away from the incident due to how damning the allegations were. It's also possible that he didn't believe his friend could of been responsible for what he was told and hoped McQueary was mistaken. This obviously applies to your "willfully blind" in a sense but is not out of the realm of possibility.

In the end all the bickering about Joe Pa and his alleged or possible involvement or lack thereof just diverts the attention from all the other culprits in this situation.