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.
What you are missing was that except for the 1998 and 2002 allegations, (which so far we only know Schultz -- the head of campus police -- knew about, and no one else) there was no connection between the principal actors in this case. The only connecting link in all of them was Jerry Sandusky.
The 1998 incident was not actionable. The 2002 incident may or may not have been accurately described to Schultz. So there is no "corruption" or "extent."