Sorry but Paterno did his job by immediately reporting what was relayed to him to the Athletic Director. It was not his responsibility to investigate. It was not his responsibility to make a possible false claim to the police department as many are accusing him of not doing.
Had he taken it upon himself to go to the police with an accusation against Sandusky, this would have been headline news. And if that accusation had proven false, Joe Paterno would have been fired and subject to a probable libel lawsuit.......
As I said, Paterno did exactly what was required of him under the extremely extenuating circumstances..........
And tho it probably means nothing to you, the Grand Jury itself has stated that Paterno cooperated fully with the investigation and had fulfilled any initial obligation he had in this sad incident.
State law says it has to be reported to Child Services. Joe saw it was not reported. Joe saw that nothing was done. Joe saw that Sandusky had free access to Joe's shower room. Joe saw that Sandusky was still holding football camps in Joe's facilities.
Joe kept quiet while Sandusky raped.
How do you define the word "immediate?" Let's say 'twas YOUR son who had been raped...?
Friday night: The rape occurs
Saturday during day: Say your son's coach hears an eyewitness account.
Saturday afternoon: Report passed on? (No)
Saturday night: Report passed on? (No)
Sunday: Report passed on? (Finally)
So Paterno knows the urgency of a hurry-up offense late in the game when they are down, but not the urgency of a felony report where children remain at risk?
Come on. Don't dumb down this crime and its tangled web of immoral responses.
It was not his responsibility to investigate. It was not his responsibility to make a possible false claim to the police department as many are accusing him of not doing. [Hot Tabasco]
Obviously it would be "reasonable" for Joe to believe it was "handled" once he passed it off that Sunday. But come on, we're talking March 2002. You'd think that by the time 2003 rolled around and Sandusky had never been arrested & he was still doing his 2003 sports camps that Joe just might get a clue that some follow-up/follow-thru was needed. (Ya think?)
Now here we are over 9.5 years later? Sandusky still had access to the main Penn State campus last week. Sandusky still ran sports camps thru 2008 at Penn State satellite campuses.
Why how "vigilant" of JoePa to do the "virtuous" thing long-term.../s NOT!!!
I also like forthedeclaration's point: What? Had Joe passed on an eyewitness report of a murder to superiors, that would have been "enough?"
Give us a break. Just pick any felony, HT, and tell us it would have been "enough" to just pass the buck once and then wash your hands of it the rest of your life! Even as you constantly bump into the perpetrator continuing to use the campus facilities!
...had fulfilled any INITIAL obligation he had in this sad incident.
Yeah, well you got this pegged by qualifying it with "initial."
And it's sad that you have taken the lame ethical stance here...one I'll describe as doing the "bare minimum legal approach" to ethics. This approach is pathetic, horrific, repulsive and sickening when you consider the context of these crimes; and if you're a proponent of these kind of "ethics," then all of these qualifiers apply to you as well!
What unbelievable bullcrap you've spewed here.
If someone comes to you with an eyewitness account of how a young boy is being anally raped in a facility and program you're responsible for, YOU CALL THE POLICE!