K. I. S. S. Keep it Simple - 1998 Did Joe Know Version

Like all difficult tasks one of the major problems in dealing with something like the Freeh Fiction and the entire Sandusky mess is the mind-numbing detail involved and the problem with attention and time. The details are in the links at the bottom but you can rest assured the shorter conclusions here are fully backed up and verified. So here we KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID in order to give even the short of time reader the FACTS about the FREEH FICTION.

Freeh condemns Paterno in 1998 in this vicious malicious LIE:

The evidence shows that these four men also knew about a 1998 criminal investigation of Sandusky relating to suspected sexual misconduct with a young boy in a Penn State football locker room shower. Again, they showed no concern about that victim. The evidence shows that Mr. Paterno was made aware of the 1998 investigation of Sandusky, followed it closely, but failed to take any action, even though Sandusky had been a key member of his coaching staff for almost 30 years, and had an office just steps away from Mr. Paterno’s. 

This is complete and utter NONSENSE. -
Followed it closely? You can't even prove he knew 
Freeh makes this specious claim from 2 Tim Curley emails mentioning "coach" in 1998 - that is all.

We know these are the only possibilities
1) That an 85 year old man either did not recall knowing that there was some kind of inquiry that cleared JS of any wrongdoing thirteen years in the past at the Grand Jury
OR
2) That he truthfully answered the question posed in the Grand Jury did you know of '"any other inappropriate sexual conduct by Jerry Sandusky with young boys?"" to which he said NO
AND
3) Since Sandusky was cleared of any inappropriate sexual conduct in 1998 an answer YES would have served Joe well because it would mean he was aware that Sandusky showering with a boy and giving him a bear hug was not deemed to be criminal by CYS DPW 2 police departments or the District Attorney.

Why does anyone have a PROBLEM with that? 
1) How in the world does it appear that Joe knew? please list evidence to that conclusion. 
2) What earthy difference does it make since Sandusky's shower bear hugs were deemed NOT CRIMINAL OR SEXUAL. 
see how Freeh's Fiction works?  "These four men also knew about a 1998 criminal investigation of Sandusky relating to suspected sexual misconduct" What these men would have known is that the conclusions made by DPW the DA and Police was NO CRIMINAL or SEXUAL MISCONDUCT. 

We view this based on the facts in evidence and the facts show that Joe - a more than decent and honorable man - did not know of the 1998 investigation 
1) MOSTLY because if he knew he would simply say YES - I knew there was a thorough investigation that concluded Jerry's showers and bear hugs were neither criminal or sexual AND 
2) FURTHER the only "evidence" Freeh could drag up from 3.5 million electronic documents and 400 interviews was two emails from Curley that mention "coach" without a single one saying "I INFORMED JOE PATERNO THAT JS WAS INVESTIGATED AND CLEARED WITH NO CHARGES" 

Here are the details of every scintilla of evidence totally revealed but all you need to know is above this line. Freeh's Statement is a VICIOUS MALICIOUS LIE - based on nothing but conjecture and 2 Curly emails mentioning 'coach'. Not one other clue leads to Joe Paterno knowing about 1998. If you need the proof here it is:

• Analysis: Coach is NOT believed to be Paterno.
• Freeh Lied About 1998 and Here's The Proof
• More ALTERED EMAIL? Blowing Up the Freeh Fiction
• Altered E-mail Found in Freeh Report Contains Dama...
• PROOF - HOW FREEH FRAMED JOE PATERNO