Is there a need for more than one article on the subject from the same paper? Beyond the original reporting, any journalist worth their salt, especially those who could be involved or who know Harman, will be waiting for the findings of the Times' investigation before commenting publicly. I presume The Times will want to be sure if there has been any plagiarism in articles submitted to them, and if so, that's where the real story will be.
I've got to say, it's some of the 'dancing on the grave', that is making me feel defensive towards Harman, despite knowing what he did was wrong. So much of what I've read about him in the last few days has nothing to do with the actual plagiarism, and more to do with people thinking him 'smug', or not liking that he has such a close relationship with many of the top players, or because of some assumed slight of their favourite player once, or that he's too much of a fan of someone who isn't their favourite player. I've even seen people complaining about how it was wrong for him to mention going to church, or some of the other more personal stuff on his personal twitter account.
Essentially, it seems that a lot of people are using this revelation as an excuse to air their own intolerances, and exercise their nasty side. It's not attractive.