[FlJoePa]

Well, I think the writer (a very good one, who I’ll now follow) is speaking from an administrative standpoint when he talks of js being an ex-assistant.

I think the important points are that up and until Joe’s testimony and eventual firing, all we had was victim #2 (McQueary/shower) and victim #4 (Central Mt. High School).

Assuming Joe didn’t know about 1998, which he testified he didn’t, how can he possibly be accused of being involved in a coverup?

[Boogieman]

I don't think the anger over Paterno is about him being involved in a "cover-up", so much as his negligence. Paterno got a report of Sandusky "horsing around" with a young boy in the shower, as he put it. Whether the school thought this was something that needed to be report to the real police or not, they thought it was serious enough to tell Sandusky not to use those facilities or bring young boys to them anymore. Yet, we have witnesses saying that Sandusky was still allowed to do just that, even after this decision was handed down.

Paterno must have known that, and apparently didn't do anything to stop it. I don't know that I would call that a cover-up, but it certainly seems negligent to me.