More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Judge H. Lee Sarokin

GET UPDATES FROM Judge H. Lee Sarokin
 

What Do Joe Paterno, Herman Cain and Dominique Strauss-Kahn Have in Common?

Posted: 12/19/11 03:08 PM ET

They were all punished and their lives disrupted based solely upon allegations of wrongdoing. Dominique Strauss-Kahn lost his high position at IMF and his bid to run for the presidency of France. Herman Cain was forced to withdraw from his campaign for President of the United States. Joe Paterno was fired from a position he had held for years serving with the respect of the entire nation. I do not defend their conduct if they are guilty of the charges against them. I do not claim that they are innocent, but there is something fundamentally wrong when mere allegations can drive persons from seeking or retaining positions of importance -- or any position for that matter.

Think about it. Each one of these men has suffered severe damage to their lives and reputations without ever having been found guilty of anything. I suspect, as I imagine most people do, that each may be guilty of something, but shouldn't the punishment follow a finding of guilt -- rather than precede it? I have taken this position consistently in prior articles in respect to Strauss-Kahn and Herman Cain, and the response usually has been that they are guilty! Comments point to Strauss-Kahn's past history of womanizing, the number of complaints against Herman Cain, and the football culture that dominates Penn State. But the point is we don't know whether or not they are guilty.

To me the worst example is Joe Paterno. Strauss-Kahn and Herman Cain took voluntary actions obviously influenced, coerced and intimidated by the media attacks upon them. But Joe Paterno's termination was imposed upon him. He wished to conclude his final year of coaching. The media reported that he was informed by a graduate assistant, Mike McQuaery that he had witnessed coach Jerry Sandusky engaged in horrible sexual conduct with a young boy. Paterno was fired purportedly for his failure to take appropriate action as a result.

Now stories have dribbled out that the assistant's account has differed. We don't know what happened. We don't know what Paterno was told or what he repeated. But he was fired nonetheless. Stories have abounded about the culture of football and its importance, and that this alleged horrendous conduct was covered-up in order to protect the program. That all may be true, but Joe Paterno and his family have been punished without a hearing, without a trial, without a modicum of fairness or due process, and all this was done in the name of public relations.

I have always taken the position that actions should be taken and well-founded charges publicized when the failure to do so poses a risk to the public. If Jerry Sandusky were still employed by Penn State, his suspension (even based upon these allegations alone) would have been appropriate and necessary in order to protect other young boys. But Joe Paterno's continued employment posed no such danger. It may turn out that he failed to do what he should have done, but there was no harm to anyone in waiting for the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth to emerge. His continued employment hurt no one. It just looked bad, and that is hardly reason enough to end a legend's career in disgrace at age 84, after 62 years of employment.

 
They were all punished and their lives disrupted based solely upon allegations of wrongdoing. Dominique Strauss-Kahn lost his high position at IMF and his bid to run for the presidency of France. Herm...
They were all punished and their lives disrupted based solely upon allegations of wrongdoing. Dominique Strauss-Kahn lost his high position at IMF and his bid to run for the presidency of France. Herm...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 17
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:13 AM on 02/08/2012
There are differences between these guys.DSK is a very powerful man who thru the years knew that
he can have any women he wanted and like former Italian PM Berlusconi , just will not pay for sex.
Cain is are 2nd grade sex maniac.
Paterno knew it was wrong on Sandusky part but the great name of the university must be upheld at all cost. All are guilty just the same.
10:16 PM on 12/20/2011
You are comparing apples and oranges. Paterno was not charged with anything. He followed the law and reported a suspected crime on campus to his superiors. Don't lump Paterno in with those two.

Herman Cain and Dominique Strauss-Kahn did something wrong. They both cheated on their wives.Cain also sexually harassed his employees.
03:43 PM on 12/20/2011
Joseph V Paterno did what he was suposed to do under PA law not only back 2002 but in force today. He reported to his superiors (Curley & Schultz) what he was told by by Mike McQuery. There was nothing else that he was supposed to do. Some have professed that they would have done more; seriously, I doubt what other people would have done.
03:29 PM on 12/20/2011
paterno hasn't even been charged with a crime, so a central tenet of your argument is a false one. there is nothing that paterno will ever be charged with or guilty of. in fact, he was a cooperating witness for the prosecution when he was fired. so far, he hasn't been accused of any wrong doing that i know of, other than not seeking vigilante justice against sandusky in the middle of the night based on sketchy, second hand information he received from one of his assistant coaches.

to compare him and his situation to cain is a farce. and to compare his situation to strauss-kahn is also a stretch, since even he was actually accused of a crime.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Judge H. Lee Sarokin
Retired after serving 17 years on the federal cour
05:55 PM on 12/20/2011
tpckeyhockey - But Paterno was terminated. My only point is that all 3 had their lives adversely affected base solely upon accusations and nothing more. You see farce---I see analogy.
timber1647
It's either sadness or euphoria
01:25 PM on 12/20/2011
Judge, I would tend to agree with you, especially given the asst.'s Grand Jury testimony. Even he wasn't sure, 100%, what he saw. What puzzled me about the Paterno dismissal was that Sandusky was not an employee of Penn State at the time, nor did he work for Paterno when the incident was reported. The asst., according to his testimony, thought when he spoke to the head of the campus police, he was in fact reporting the incident to the police. Hopefully, a lesson learned. Campus police officers are not a substitute for the real thing. Regardless, the firing of Paterno was a political, CYA move on the part of the University Trustees. It's a shame. In the eyes of the law, so far, Paterno did nothing wrong.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Judge H. Lee Sarokin
Retired after serving 17 years on the federal cour
05:57 PM on 12/20/2011
timber1647 - I can understand everyone's outrage over the failure to report this conduct to the police. But I can also understand Paterno's reluctance to do it.
08:24 PM on 12/19/2011
You are right. Under normal circumstances a person should be considered "innocent until proven guilty". Unfortunately, there are times when due course cannot happen within a reasonable time frame and some times the court of public is the correct path. In the case of Kahn and Cain both were heading towards positions that do significantly impact the lives of millions. Both espoused beliefs that the behaviors they were being charged with was morally wrong and in both cases these were not isolated events. While nobody is perfect I do believe that most of us practice what they preach and while there may be confusing moments there shouldn't be many. So unless our society is willing to say otherwise I would rather that some things aren't found out after a person takes a position of power. It really shouldn't be "what you say" that is important, it should be "what you do".
03:36 PM on 12/19/2011
Judge, you make a valid point; however, sometimes a person can become a victim of their own illusions. Paterno made the fatal mistake of equating his coaching success, his standing in Happy Valley, and most definitely the admiration from his ravenous fans as legitimate power. Walk around believing all your own positive press, so full of yourself that you'd place the safety of little children somewhere behind the glory and honor of your heralded football program, sooner or later, you are going to stumble and fall. Paterno established himself as judge, jury, and executioner for several decades of all things related to Penn State football. He was the all knowing, all seeing, all powerful coach who just so happened to have a pedophile as a trusted assistant coach.
04:58 PM on 12/19/2011
I find it amazing that people prove the point of the column without even realizing it - you say "Walk around believing all your own positive press, ... so full of yourself that you's place the safety of little children somewhere behind the the glory and honor of your football program" - this is PRECISELY the point - not only has it not been proven that Paterno did those things, but in fact every shred of evidence points to the fact that he DID NOT - yet public perception, based on supposition and media hype, has you believing and stating that he did. To the judge's point, you have summarily found Paterno guilty of what you described without benefit of the trial, or even THE FULL GRAND JURY REPORT OF HIS TESTIMONY, which has not yet been released. This was a digital lynching, fanned by a media horde anxious to top each other in hyperbole and social media run amok. The angry mob wanted the Mayor of Penn State hung and the village burned down, and that;s what they got.
07:08 PM on 12/19/2011
First off, there is no one in Pennsylvania, and certainly no one at Penn State, who made JoePa do a darn thing he did not want to do. If he feels that he has been wronged by the public or the school. Where is the wrongful termination lawsuit? Where is the public outcry that he was railroaded? Where is his own statement on what he did or did not know? Keeping his mouth shut and hiding behind lawyers make him appear guilty of at least knowing, if not condoning. What is JoePa afraid of?
03:38 PM on 12/20/2011
I, respectfully, consider Judge Sarokin's comments unreasonable. Mr. McQuaery relayed to Mr Paterno the utter impropriety and definitely sexual nature of what he saw Sandusky doing. Mr Paterno sat on it because it was Saturday, instead of calling the police.He didn't want to disturb his weekend (his own words.) He had to be fired.
As for Mr. Cain, he suffered no loss. On the contrary, he achieved his goal to make his name and business well known. Now his speaker fees are way high. The women coming out showed the moral looseness of him, an different tale from the imagine he started from. Having achieved his objective, and realizing that we had only seen the tip of the iceberg, he left good enough alone.
And Mr Strauss-Kahn, whos only concern is having sex day and night, should dedicate himself to his passion and stop blaming others for his fall. Just go peacefully away and embrace his real calling and talent. He is no presidential material.

As