Switch to Desktop Site
 
 

Why Phil Knight changed his opinion on Joe Paterno

Next Previous

Page 2 of 7

About these ads

"The lack of factual report for the ... inaccurate and unfounded findings related to Mr. Paterno, and its numerous process-oriented deficiencies, was a rush to injustice and calls into question the credibility of the entire Report," Thornburgh was quoted as saying in the family's analysis, posted on the website paterno.com.

Months in the making, the report was billed as an independent analysis of the work by Freeh, who defended his report Sunday.

"I stand by our conclusion that four of the most powerful people at Penn State failed to protect against a child sexual predator harming children for over a decade," he said in a statement issued through a spokesman.

The family's report concluded that observations related to Paterno in the Freeh report were unfounded, and were a disservice to Paterno, the university community and Sandusky's victims, "and the critical mission of educating the public on the dangers of child sexual victimization."

The central claim that Paterno "was engaged in a conspiracy ... there's simply no basis anywhere in the report for that finding. That in my view renders the whole report of very little value," Thornburgh said in an interview with The Associated Press. "There's simply nothing in this record, in the Freeh report, that indicates he was involved in any way."

Next Previous

Page 2 of 7

Share