You have GOT to be kidding me.
Fact #1: You have no knowledge of the events beyond your 1-sided and obviously biased interpetation.
For all reading I suggest you read these articles:
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=1895476
http://www.queencitynews.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=3286
Fact #2: The young man involved killed himself.
Fact #3: The findings of the review still prevented the player from rejoining the team and simply allowed the player to return to classes pending results from the criminal charges.
Fact #4: MVD had known said player much longer than 30 days.
Fact #5: We are all innocent until proven guilty
Opinion #1: You are faulting the man for defending one of his players when no evidence had been presented? I would hope that all involved in my life would not bail on me the second trouble presents itself. He stood up when others sit down.
Opinion #2: How did his participation as a character witness protect the image of the program? Criminal charges were still pending. All this review did was allow the student the ability to go back to classes. He was not allowed to participate in football and it did not hide the matter from public scrutiny.
Opinion #3: How dare you question the motives of a man. Especially in a situation like this. And especially when you don't know what the he!! you're talking about.