Fox News reported on a study of Paterno's actions after he was made aware of misconduct by his employees.
The excerpt notes the following findings:
Again and again, the 269-page report by Freeh's group showed how Penn State officials had a "callous and shocking disregard for child victims." They lied, then lied about their lies. Even now, the loyalty to the lie about Paterno being a man of integrity (despite evidence proving he lied to a grand jury regarding his knowledge of the 1998 investigation) is galling.
Trust and integrity go hand in hand in leadership.
*Do you feel that Paterno's actions should be weighted as heavily as the perpetrator? Why or why not?
Paterno's actions should definitely be weighted as heavily as the perpetrator, and in this case, more so. Paterno was in a role of authority and responsibility, and he was completely negligent in his duties. He could have stood up and could have been the advocate for these children that were sexually abused, once learning that there were cases of sexual abuse that had taken place. If he would have been a man of integrity, he would have made an immediate statement that would ...
This solution provides an extensive, detailed discussion on Paterno and the integrity of his actions. A thorough explanation is given determining if Paterno's actions should be weighed as heavily as the perpetrator's actions.