Joe Paterno was a mandated reporter of child abuse under Pennsylvania law.
Pennsylvania Mandated Reporting of Child Abuse
What is the Child Protective Services Law (CPSL)?
The PA Child Protective Services Act was signed into law in 1975. It was enacted to protect children from abuse, allow the opportunity for healthy growth and development and, whenever possible, preserve and stabilize the family.
Who is mandated to report?
Individuals who, in the practice of their employment, occupation or practice of a profession, come into contact with children and have reasonable cause to suspect that a child under the care, supervision, guidance, or training of that person or of an agency, institution, organization or other entity with which that person is affiliated is a victim of child abuse.
What is the Child Protective Services Law (CPSL)?
The PA Child Protective Services Act was signed into law in 1975. It was enacted to protect children from abuse, allow the opportunity for healthy growth and development and, whenever possible, preserve and stabilize the family.
May God have mercy on the victims of Penn State.
The language you are citing looks more like it comes from the brochure you attached as a pdf file than directly quoting a statute.
Nonetheless, let us suppose that the language fairly reflects that statute. Under the language you cited, Joe Paterno was NOT a mandated reporter of child abuse under Pennsylvania law.
The first and third paragraphs of the brochure language you cited are irrelevant to the question. They are political puffery to remind us that our politicians are on the job.
Focus on the middle paragraph headed WHO IS MANDATED TO REPORT? which is the question. Nobody knows to this day the identity of Sandusky's child victim of the anal rape in the shower room, if that is what occurred, nor with any certainty what actually occurred in the shower room. Paterno most certainly did not witness that incident, if any. All he has to go on is a report to him by McQueary who claimed to be a witness. He might be able to report what McQueary told him to a child protection authority but Paterno could not testify to it in court since testifying as to what McQueary told him is classic excludable hearsay.
Paterno never came into contact with the child/victim by any allegation of fact of which we are aware. Paterno did not customarily come into contact with children in his capacity as Penn State football head coach. Paterno had no care, supervision, guidance or training responsibility to any child, much less the child victim of this crime, if any, nor did the Penn State football program have any such responsibilities toward the unknown child snuck onto the premises by the retired Sandusky during a university holiday period.
The most that you might say is that IF Paterno was responsible for the child/victim which he was not, he might have been chargeable with a misdemeanor violation. As a practical matter, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and its prison authorities would gladly see to the dismissal of any such charges to avoid paying the medical bills on his final bouts with lung cancer. If Paterno cared at all about a virgin criminal record, he would have filed a motion to dismiss the charges and away goes trouble down the drain. That's a guarantee.
Shame on FlJoePa for continually trying to rewrite history about this stupid, stupid criminally negligent old man.
...my my my, such ranting...it contributes nothing to the conversation, you know, except that it says a great deal about you yourself.