It is my understnading that Joe learned of it SECOND HAND and did not witness it FIRST HAND. Agree with you if he saw it first hand. If you witness it, then that is where you need to draw the line.
This is what to do when learning something like this second hand. Do whatever the policy say to do... Then that is what I would do. There are so many laws and lawyers in a business (yes a college is a business)... you have to follow what are the proper steps. You can’t go on some Vigelante mission. It will only backfire on you. Now that is what I understand Joe did back in 2002 when he heard something second hand.
Now if Joe eye witnessed it, then like I said he did not do enough. However, I don’t think that is the case.
It is my understnading that Joe learned of it SECOND HAND and did not witness it FIRST HAND.
<><><><><>
And if you were reading this thread without blood in your eyes, you would have seen that is exactly what I wrote.
What you are calling second hand information the courts refer to as eyewitness testimony.
Yes, Joe Paterno did the absolute minimum he was supposed to have done. And in the case of homosexual rape by authority figures, that’s good enough for you.
OK. I guess I expect a bit more.