Blue White Illustrated

General Dick Thornburgh, former FBI profiler and child sex crimes expert Jim Clemente and Dr. Fred S. Berlin, a sexual disorders expert at Johns Hopkins University. Their contention? That Paterno never asked nor told anyone not to investigate or report McQueary���s allegation made against Sandusky in February 2001. The family���s report also claims that the Freeh report was incomplete, relying primarily on about 30 documents, including only three notes authored by Paterno, and 17 emails. Four of those emails referred to Paterno. Freeh, on the other hand, said his team conducted 430 interviews and analyzed more than 3.5 million emails and documents to conclude that Paterno was involved in an ���active agreement to conceal��� the misdeeds of Sandusky. Thornburgh, who is described in the report as ���an expert in conducting effective fact investigations,��� said many of Freeh���s factual findings were limited and mostly hearsay. The most glaring omission, Thornburgh said, was the fact that three of the four major subjects ��� Paterno, Tim Curley and Gary Schultz ��� were not interviewed for the report. The Paternos��� report also claims the Freeh report was oversold to the public, and the university and NCAA ���detrimentally��� relied on the Freeh report in a rush to judgment about the former coach. The Paternos continued their bid to persuade the public with appearances on ESPN and ABC the day after the release of their report. Jay spent Feb. 11 in Bristol, Conn., appearing on a variety of ESPN radio and television programs. Sue had a prerecorded interview with ABC correspondent Katie Couric that aired in the afternoon. Both vigorously defended Joe Paterno and delved into the alternatives to the Freeh report. It���s still unclear just how effective the effort has been. Critics have dismissed the family���s report as a biased, last-ditch effort to salvage Paterno���s legacy without presenting any new facts. Others have said it only creates a larger divide between those who stand by Paterno and those who don���t. Jay Paterno said he hopes that at the very least, the report shines a light on the problem of child sex abuse, which he said was another shortcoming of the Freeh report. The experts who contributed to the Paterno report ��� Clemente and Berlin ��� said Sandusky was a ���skilled and masterful manipulator��� who deceived an entire community by cultivating an image as a ���playful nice guy.��� They said the former Nittany Lion assistant coach had a rare ability to lure victims. Clemente said Sandusky was in the top 1 percent of the pedophiles he���s studied at ���grooming��� behavior. The experts concluded that it was possible Paterno was unaware of Sandusky���s crimes because he, too, was taken in by the former coach���s masquerade. ���There are a lot of things in [the report] that educate everyone about ���nice guy��� offenders,��� Jay Paterno said on ESPN���s ���Mike & Mike in the Morning��� radio show. ���I���m a parent of five. I have young kids, and as I read that part of the report ��� recommendations and red flags to look for ��� it���s pretty shocking. There were things that I was unaware of and society is unaware of. So I think that was the most important thing.��� A change in the weather? E verybody has an opinion about what went wrong at Penn State, from Louis Freeh to the guy at the bar stool next to yours. That���s the problem with the Freeh report: It contains enough ambiguity to keep Joe Paterno���s critics and his defenders sniping at each other forever. On Feb. 10, the Paterno family did more than just snipe. Their massive rebuttal to the Freeh report, rolled out with the help of a slick new website and national TV and radio appearances by the likes of Sue Paterno and former U.S. Attorney General Dick Thornburgh, sifts through the evidence, catalogues errors and omissions, and challenges the report���s harshest assertions. No punches are pulled. Freeh���s findings are labeled ���deeply flawed��� and his conclusions about Paterno���s role in the Sandusky scandal are deemed ���unsubstantiated and unfair.��� Deemed by whom? Well, that raises another point of contention. The new report was compiled by King & Spalding at the behest of the Paterno family, and it has been presented to the public by Wick Sollers, the family���s attorney. Those are obvious conflicts of interest, so it���s best to regard the Paterno report as the defense���s opening statement in a trial that just happens to be playing out in the court of public opinion. The Paternos��� review attacks the Freeh report where it���s weakest: on questions of motive. Freeh concluded that Paterno, together with university president Graham Spanier, vice president Gary Schultz and athletic director Tim Curley, conspired to hush up allegations against Jerry Sandusky in order to protect the football program from bad publicity. But Freeh uncovered no evidence that Paterno was concerned about potential harm to the Nittany Lions. Even after Curley and Schultz were indicted on perjury and failure-to-report charges in November 2011, Penn State���s longtime coach clearly did not comprehend the magnitude of what had happened. Joe Posnanski���s biography ���Paterno��� recounts a conversation between the coach and his son Scott the day after the Sandusky presentment was released. ���I���ve got Nebraska to think about,��� Paterno tells Scott. ���I can���t worry about this.��� The new report doesn���t appear to SEE CHANGE NEXT PAGE

• Cover