FBI investigation found him culpable. Paterno had evidence of bad behavior and did nothing for six years. When a report came to him that a little boy was naked and being molested he said, "I did not know what to do." Finally he consulted his athletic department guidelines and referred the matter and "thought nothing more of it." He should have called the police. He is a mandated reporter. Also, I wonder if his grandson was being raped at a local high school if he would have just called the principal and then thought nothing more of it. When a crime occurs, especially of child abuse, you call the police.
After Sandusky was fired by Penn State and after the allegations came to light, Paterno was asked under oath if the firing had anything to do with the the 47 counts of child molestation or if he and Sandusky had ever discussed them. He said "No" on both counts.
The NCAA is supposed to protect college athletics by making sure that (football in particular) does not become so big that it begins to dwarf the ordinary and usual ethical considerations. The head of the athletic department at Penn State, who resigned because of his role in the scandal, and Joe Paterno, acted at best like deer caught in the head lights. You are free to disagree but I am convinced that they lost sight of their basic moral decision making responsibilities because Penn State football was so much bigger than that to them.
I understand that there is a documentary coming out about these events called, "Happy Valley." If I am not mistaken it is being put together by the same people who did the documentary expose about Pat Tillman and the army disinformation campaign about his death. Could be interesting.
Your timeline is so wrong it is not even funny.
First, the FBI did not find him culpable, a former agent hired by the Board of Trustees claimed to.......and that report has be shredded.
As for his actions regarding the the 2nd hand report......he did EXACTLY as he was supposed to do. He followed university procedures. He was not a witness to the event. He only had second hand knowledge. He reported it to the head of the campus PD. as a university employee.....he had an obligation to follow procedure.......then to step out of the way. You may disagree with the procedure, but it does not make him guilty for following it.
If Paterno really wanted to cover things up, he never would have reported it in the first place.
May, 1998: Jerry Sandusky is investigated by campus police for showering with a young boy in Penn State facilities. No charges are filed .
May, 1999: Jerry Sandusky is informed by Joe Paterno that he will not be the head coach at Penn State.
Dec, 1999: Sandusky receives professor emeritus standing at Penn State including an office on campus. He receives access to all rec facilities. He had full access to the football facilities as well.
At this point....Paterno had no control over Sandusky. He could not keep him out of athletic facilities or off campus. He was advised by the university that they would be sued if they attempted to ban him.
The AD the VP and Pres all have guilt on their hands.
As far as "deer in the head lights" I would be too if having followed the proper procedure on something heard about 2nd hand....you find yourself being blamed for.
"Mr. Paterno explained his actions before he died by saying that “I was afraid to do something that might jeopardize what the University procedure was. So I backed away and turned it over to some other people, people I thought would have a little more expertise than I did.” Freeh Report at 77-78."
