Your take is about like mine. I think that the then Student Assistant may have worded his reporting to Paterno entirely different from what he had to report as an older adult testifying to a grand jury as to what he saw.
I think Paterno, nine years ago at 75, had blinders on and could not fathom someone he had known for years being capable of something that he couldn’t concieve of.
My dad was old school, about 10 years older than Paterno and I remember he could not comprehend how a co-worker of his who later worked for me went off the deep end in a different manner. Dad had matured in an era where such things were more rare and where such crimianals were long gone prior to perfecting their perversion through middle age as this guy had done.
Would-have, could-have, should-have....
The grad student was 28 years old.
I am 28 years old. If I saw an adult man raping a young boy I would damn well not walk away and call my father.
If someone came to me and reported someone I worked with was being inappropriate with a kid, I’d ask for specifics, too. Both grad student and coach were massively at fault there.
Well, look, I hate the lasting smell of “guilt by association”, and always have. The tone of this SF reporter all huffy against only Paterno when no one there, or here, knows for sure that Paterno knew squat about every jot and tittle of campus gossip on Sandusky.
I can back off defending Paterno when I hear the evidence that he actually knew more than he turned in, or covered up for the creep, but there is absolutely none yet. Sheesh. The guy is cannon fodder old and can’t possibly be up to both coaching Penn State, ramroding investigations into a guy who wasn’t even employed there, and orchestrating cover ups. A bridge too far at this early point in the story.