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.
The way the law works in mandated reporting is that it's like a game of tag, where everyone who gets touched is 'it'. McQueary told Paterno. Regardless of what McQueary did or did not do, by telling Paterno, Paterno is responsible to report it to child welfare authorities. With apologies to Delta Dawn– who must never have set foot on a college campus and known firsthand the professional standard known as 'University Police"– it was negligent of Paterno not to have called in someone (specifically: child welfare authorities) from outside the university. He'd been there long enough to know it would get covered up. He chose football over child rape.
And don't tell me Paterno didn't know. Wink wink, nudge nudge, Sandusky sandwich anyone? If it's true that Paterno didn't know what was going on under his very nose then he is an even bigger idiot. It's his flippin' program!
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.
Not true. Paterno directed and no doubt met personally with boys too young to legally sign themselves into his program. Are you telling me that Penn State never had football camps for kids, or mentoring programs, or that prospective (underage) kids never came to or stayed on campus specifically because of the football program? Or at the invitation of Joe Paterno? He had care and supervision of minors, and those dealing with them.
Paterno was a mandated reporter. He did not notify child welfare authorities. He had every reason to believe the university would swallow the scandal.
He can rot in hell.
but Paterno could not testify to it in court since testifying as to what McQueary told him is classic excludable hearsay.
...in re-reading your posts I came across this...I’m sure you’re aware that Paterno did exactly that to a grand jury, which the last I looked qualified as a court of law...
...I know grand jury proceedings are distinct from open court, and I’m not aware of hearsay distinctions which may apply, as I’m not a lawyer...and if you provide a cogent response, I’ll defer to your knowledge...but your original statement above needs explanation...