Most of us can agree that in the court of public opinion represented by the media, JoePa is guilty as charged of enabling, or a cover up, or a moral lapse, whatever. The implication is that Sandusky's alleged crimes are taken as a given. In the public eye, he's done, finished, kaput.
According to this article:
Sandusk'y defense is trying to soften up or sow doubt in the public perception of the supposed slam dunk case, hence the Costas interview etc.
Does anyone think this has a chance to work after even JoePa was crucified by the media? Please, I'm curious.