In reporter Mike Dawson’s March 10 article concerning the board of trustees, trustees justify their actions as “the right decision given the details of the presentment.”
Even Attorney General Linda Kelly’s office said a presentment is nothing more than a preliminary summary that doesn’t necessarily include all of the evidence.
If a presentment is infallible, why have trials?
In “Bringing Down a Legend: How Pennsylvania’s Investigating Grand Jury Ended Joe Paterno’s Career,” author Brian Gallini cites People v. McCabe. Consider: “A presentment is a foul blow. It wins the importance of a judicial document, yet it lacks its principal attributes — the right to answer and to appeal. It accuses but furnishes no forum for a denial. No one knows upon what evidence the findings are based. An indictment may be challenged — even defeated. The presentment is immune. It is like the “hit and run” motorist. Before application can be made to suppress it, it is the subject of public gossip. The damage is done. The injury it may unjustly inflict may never be healed.”