Franco Harris, last week:
“I find it hard to believe that on Nov. 9th, that all 32 board members wanted Joe Paterno fired,” Harris said. “Hopefully, someone will come forward and admit they didn’t want Joe Paterno fired. This wasn’t a football problem. If it had been a football issue, believe me, Joe Paterno would have handled this.
“The present leadership thinks it’s right what happened and how this was handled. And we all know it was wrong. And this comes from our current leadership. They’re hoping everything goes on as normal. All I want is the truth.
“I think we deserve it.”
Hopefully, somebody supplied him with a copy of this article out of the New York Times today:
The board, scrambling to address the child sexual abuse scandal involving the university and its football program, had already decided to remove Graham B. Spanier as president. Then, many of those present recalled this week, the tension in the room mounted. Joe Paterno’s future was next up. Surma announced that an agreement appeared to have been reached to fire Paterno, too — the trustees having determined that he had failed to take adequate action when he was told that one of his longtime assistants had been seen molesting a 10-year-old boy in Paterno’s football facility.
Surma, those present recalled, surveyed the other trustees — there are 32 — for their opinions and emotions before asking one last question: “Does anyone have any objections? If you have an objection, we’re open to it.”
No one in the room spoke. There was silence from the phone speakers. Paterno’s 46-year tenure as head coach of one of the country’s storied college football programs was over, and the gravity of the action began to sink in.
Or more importantly (emphasis mine):
“To me, it wasn’t about guilt or innocence in a legal sense,” the trustee Kenneth C. Frazier, the chief executive at Merck, said of Paterno’s decision not to go to police. “It was about these norms of society that I’m talking about: that every adult has a responsibility for every other child in our community. And that we have a responsibility not to do the minimum, the legal requirement. We have a responsibility for ensuring that we can take every effort that’s within our power not only to prevent further harm to that child, but to every other child.”
