Not true. Read p. 7 again of the Grand Jury Presentment: Grand Jury Presentment
This was victim #2...it doesn't matter that Sandusky was no longer an employee...'cause as you mentioned, he had full on-campus privileges. Retired employees cannot engage in open-ended carte-blanche anything goes behavior minus potential consequences.
He immediately reported the incident with the grad student but that was AFTER Sundusky retired. Paterno had no authority over him and no authority to deny him access to the campus.
Again...what does it matter that Sandusky was retired by 2002? What distinction does that make? If McQueary saw a reporter with lockerroom privileges raping a kid in the showers late post-game, would that matter that the reporter wasn't an employee of Penn State? How ludicrous can you get in pointing out "Facts" that are entirely irrelevant?
IN my parallel analogy of a reporter/journalist raping a kid, Paterno wouldn't have any authority over him, either...nor PERSONAL authority to deny him access to the locker room. But, again, so what?
You mean to tell me that if all Paterno did was to lateral an eyewitness account of a journalist raping a kid to his superiors, but never followed up on it, that would have been A-OK with you? Really?
Again, that investigation was also stifled.
What investigation? I'm sorry but this story seems to be quite lost on you...the FACTS are that no investigation was jumpstarted on THIS case till over half a dozen years after the fact...(Sandusky was being investigated in '07...but that was ANOTHER case)...
It wasn't that the investigation was started and then squelched. Penn State never even allowed a "take-off" because all of them -- including Paterno -- kept quiet!
So there is nothing here about Paterno covering anything up.
Sure there is. First, he delayed telling his supervisors for 24 hours. (What? What if YOUR kid was accessable to a re-rape the night Paterno said nothing)
But here's what's a LOT worse: He never followed up in the LONG RUN to ensure that the authorities (not just his superiors) found out McQueary's eyewitness report. In fact, he upgraded McQueary's lot in life (from grad asst to wide receivers coach & then head of recruiting). What? You don't think Paterno had the option of asking McQueary if the police had ever questioned him...and upon finding out 'no' -- to use his considerable influence to direct McQueary to do that?
Imagine, if you would, if McQueary had seen a shower murder and body disposal. Do you think if McQueary told Paterno about such a thing, that Paterno's "obligations" to "report" the "incident" would have been entirely met if he had merely told the account to his superiors -- and his superiors alone?
Are you crazy? IF he never then followed up to ask McQueary if the police had questioned him...then, yes...ya better believe a cover-up was operative.
It has everything to do that Sandusky was retired v. still coaching. In the second Paterno has authority, in the first he doesn’t. Sandusky was retired. Why was Paterno supposed to follow up? It was his bosses jobs to follow up. He did his job to direct the grad student to his bosses. That’s about all you can do.
I know from experience that you have no right to follow up after that as it becomes a private and confidential matter and his superiors couldn’t have told him jack anyway about Sandusky, a reporter, or anyone else not working under Joe. Joe didn’t have a right to know and their lawyers would have been emphatic on that point, including Paterno talking to McQueary. That’s how it rolls today in today’s over-litigated world.
Employers have policies now. Like it or not that’s the way it is. Where I’ve worked I’ve been specifically instructed NOT to call the police but report it to my boss - or lose my job. And also to talk about it to no one. As politically correct as universities are, don’t you think it might be somewhat the same there?
The second the grad student told Curley it became an investigation, whether anyone investigated or not. They chose to do nothing and stifled any inquiry, breaking the law in the process. And, the grad student was the SECOND employee to report Sandusky molesting the same kid. They immediately killed the investigation both times. I’d say the majority of blame is heaped on Curley and Shultz.
In your mind it was cover up because Paterno waited 24 hours. But was it in Joe’s mind? Was there intent and motive. He may have thought he was doing the right thing. I’ve seen some of the nicest people do the most well-intentioned things that were absolutely wrong and never know it - to the point of giving McQueary a promotion because he in Joe Pa’s mind did the right thing and was a stand up guy. I don’t see an insidious conspiracy by Paterno here.
I’m not saying Paterno is blameless, but in the end he’s incidental. Curley, Shultz, and university cops share the bulk of the blame for enabling Sandusky because alot of Sandusky’s actions were going on outside of Paterno’s circle of influence. It wasn’t like Paterno was the gatekeeper here - Curley and Shultz were.