Based on the Grand Jury report, I envision a 1999 meeting that went very much like this: "The DA may not have had sufficient evidence to prosecute, and CPS may have declined to go any further, but I am going to see to it that you are never head coach of this program, and that you never work for another team in the NCAA. SERS has a pension buyout going that will allow you to retire on 87% of your income if you get out now. I suggest you take it. It's the best deal you're going to get."
And, given that it is virtually IMPOSSIBLE to fire a university employee, especially on the basis of what were nothing more than rumors at that point for all legal purposes, that would have been a very good stand for Paterno to take. But he will get no credit from the lynch mob. No. Instead, people who know of nothing more than accusations -- many of which are in dispute right now -- are jumping to the silliest and most reprehensible kinds of conclusions about Paterno, PSU employees, the entire university, and even the "Pennsylvania State House."
And yet the governor of Pennsylvania spent plenty of time doing damage control in the media this week.
Let’s say Paterno did as you have posited, allbeit simply an example of what might have occurred.
Even with that allowed, isn’t it far more appropriate for the public to remain outraged by a system which continues to allow, even promote sexual immorality and its consequences, than to ignore them, their consequences in this particular situation over the last decade, and possibly condone their continuance and emulation by other criminals in the future?
I see nothing wrong in observing how far this corrupt system has crept. It has been a contagion which needs observation and corrective actions. Without identifying its extent, the root of the corruption is likely to spread even further.
Which he clearly did not do.