Read on Twitter
Mark Steyn has filed an eviscerating and well-informed Motion for Summary Judgement in the Michael Mann vanity libel suit. https://www.steynonline.com/documents/10973.pdf
with memorandum https://www.steynonline.com/documents/10974.pdf
with memorandum https://www.steynonline.com/documents/10974.pdf
2/ Steyn, for the most part, stayed out of the complicated SLAAP proceedings, holding his fire for the Summary Judgement phase. I'm not going to review or precis these documents, but will quote a couple of sizzling early paragraphs.
3/ Steyn notes that court previously identified issue as whether Penn State conducted "inadequate and ineffective investigations into their employees, including Sandusky and Mann". Steyn: "it has been thoroughly adjudicated" and Mann's mentor "is heading to jail".
4/ rubbing salt in the open sore, brief says: "while Mann claims he was defamed by Steyn’s linking him with the Sandusky case, in his just-published book The New Climate War, Mann thanks one of the convicted criminals in the Sandusky case." Ouch.
5/ Steyn observed that Easterling participated in Inquiry Committee activities despite purporting to recuse. Steyn omitted most important example: Easterling intervened to prevent Inquiry Committee from contacting Mann critics and victims https://climateaudit.org/2011/11/15/new-information-at-penn-state/
6/ some astounding revelations in Steyn memorandum from discovery on Penn State conduct during investigation. Initial view of Inquiry Committee was that they "could not prove that [Mann was] not guilty" of first 3 counts and therefore would have to proceed to an investigation.
![6/ some astounding revelations in Steyn memorandum from discovery on Penn State conduct during investigation. Initial view of Inquiry Committee was that they "could not prove that [Mann was] not guilty" of first 3 counts and therefore would have to proceed to an investigation.](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EseJV0yXUAA-tL8.png "6/ some astounding revelations in Steyn memorandum from discovery on Penn State conduct during investigation. Initial view of Inquiry Committee was that they \"could not prove that [Mann was] not guilty\" of first 3 counts and therefore would have to proceed to an investigation.")
7/ in discovery, Foley said that Inquiry Committee "could not find anything to prove Mann's innocence" and that, according to pleading, did not "exonerate" Mann.
8/ Steyn says that Foley "secretly" sent a draft of Inquiry Committee report to Penn State President Spanier (who is now a convicted felon in connection with Sandusky scandal) and that Spanier secretly replied to Foley with changes to report.
9/ Spanier then told Foley to be mindful of the impact that "bad publicity" of the Mann case would have on Penn State. Needless to say, in Freeh report on Sandusky case, Spanier's concern about bad publicity also marred Penn State's handling of that case.
10/ the brief goes on and on, revealing the failings of the Penn State inquiry and investigation in excruciating detail.
