Sandusky was not part of the football program when this happened and it appears he had a right to access the training facilities as part of his retirement. This would not have been negotiated by Paterno.
REGARDLESS, of the inactions of others on the Penn State Campus, a responsible man would have demanded details concerning this incident,
Schultz and Curley told the Grand Jury that it was all just horseplay, which is why they are facing charges. Why do you think they would have told Paterno any different?
Why Shultz and Curley were charged was because they reported this incident of child rape as “horseplay”, after being told by the graduate student that it was obviously anal sex.
Sandusky WAS a part of the PennStatePedo program during the 1998 incident. This led, no doubt, to his “retirement” - where he was still running a program for troubled young men and still had access to PennStatePedo facilities. This led to the 2002 incident that was written off as “horseplay” by the two.
But there was no need for either man to tell Paterno anything - as he had already received a first hand account from the graduate student - Paterno was the first official employed by PennStatePedo that was told of the SECOND incident.
Who knows how many knew about the FIRST incident of this guy being caught in the shower with a male child.
1) If Sandusky was not part of the football program, why did the Grad Student feel the need to report the incident to Paterno?
2) I don’t think Paterno needed to be “told” anything.
It is clear he had a very good idea that this was much more than “horseplay”, and of a serial nature.