View Single Post
Old 01-10-2013   #122
StanleySpadowski
Senior Member
 
StanleySpadowski's Avatar
 
Joined:
Apr 2004
Posts:
4,812
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joseephuss View Post
The whole premise is that Paterno did know something about Sandusky earlier than the 2001 incident, yet here he said he didn't. That can be classified as a falsehood.
So you're saying you know that Paterno heard a rumor?

He may or may not have been informed about '98 after '01, that's up for debate, but there's never been a single source to show that he knew of '98 before then.

The biggest problem with people reading the Freeh report emails is that they assume "the first incident" refers to the '98 investigation. Again, that may or may not be the case but people read into that what they wish.
StanleySpadowski is offline   Reply With Quote